AUTEL EVO II PRO V2 firmware upgrade: TIPS

[lukappaseidue]

Hi guys,
I explane my experience upgrading the fw of my V2
the upgrade FW of the EVO, by MicroSD card, is the same of the V1, BUT it requires about 30 minutes to ends.
Be sure to have drone and aircraft fully charged.
During the process, the FW update take a very long time; when it reach 80% it seems locked, the drone start playing the boot sound), and also battery leds (the 2 leds in the middle) start blinking.
IT IS ALL NORMAL.
Take your time and wait!
Remember that If you have more than one battery (the battery fw module has been updated to 0.0.16.0) you must repeat the upgrade for each one

 

[BlairAir]

I agree - There are multiple reboots of the Aircraft and the RC reboots at least once. Since I have 4 batteries, I had to do the dance 4 times, something that Autel really needs to address. I may be oversimplifying things (and I probably am, since I have looked at the update logs and it is a long, if not particularly complex routine) - but its seems that they could save the battery code to the drone, then apply it any time a battery that has older code on it get's inserted. It already queries the batteries, this is how it ends up alerting that there is "new" firmware when batteries are inserted.

As I said, it's not entirely fair for me to criticize the inability to do this an easier way, and there may be some technical hurdles that need to be overcome, but I am just going to say it: If DJI can find a way to do battery updates as a separate operation, then it should be possible for Autel to do so assuming they don't have some underlying hardware difference that requires the long, repetitive application or THE SAME CODE over and over, just to hit the battery portion of the routine and push that code to the battery. I would even settle for a separate bit on "Battery Only" code to run manually. Not everyone would want this, but it is no worse that running the ENTIRE package OVER AND OVER. This introduces RISK. A failed FW push can sometimes be overcome by running it again. Sometimes. Other times, you brick the hardware and end up sending it in so they can use tools we don't have access to or replace the hardware. Risk. This is why I go into all this rant. Un-necessary risk.

 

[kenautelevo2pro]

I agree - There are multiple reboots of the Aircraft and the RC reboots at least once. Since I have 4 batteries, I had to do the dance 4 times, something that Autel really needs to address. I may be oversimplifying things (and I probably am, since I have looked at the update logs and it is a long, if not particularly complex routine) - but its seems that they could save the battery code to the drone, then apply it any time a battery that has older code on it get's inserted. It already queries the batteries, this is how it ends up alerting that there is "new" firmware when batteries are inserted.

As I said, it's not entirely fair for me to criticize the inability to do this an easier way, and there may be some technical hurdles that need to be overcome, but I am just going to say it: If DJI can find a way to do battery updates as a separate operation, then it should be possible for Autel to do so assuming they don't have some underlying hardware difference that requires the long, repetitive application or THE SAME CODE over and over, just to hit the battery portion of the routine and push that code to the battery. I would even settle for a separate bit on "Battery Only" code to run manually. Not everyone would want this, but it is no worse that running the ENTIRE package OVER AND OVER. This introduces RISK. A failed FW push can sometimes be overcome by running it again. Sometimes. Other times, you brick the hardware and end up sending it in so they can use tools we don't have access to or replace the hardware. Risk. This is why I go into all this rant. Un-necessary risk.

agreed. and you should have been around 15 years for ALL electronics when sw update was new...it was a nightmare and totally risky. it's much better now but still....I get your point.

 

[BlairAir]

SW wasnt new 15 years ago. I was around. Been in IT for 40 years. Worked for IBM, worked for Verizon, NetApp, EMC and last 10 years for USEPA as a storage subject matter expert/senior storage engineer. I have seen it all. I added RAM to my first PC by pressing IC'S into the PCB: 24-16 k chips to add 384 k to my 640 for a total of 1 Megabyte of ram. This is why I say that regardless of hurdles Autel is taking the easy way out, putting extra work on end users and introducing risk where it's uncalled for.

 

[kenautelevo2pro]

SW wasnt new 15 years ago. I was around. Been in IT for 40 years. Worked for IBM, worked for Verizon, NetApp, EMC and last 10 years for USEPA as a storage subject matter expert/senior storage engineer. I have seen it all. I added RAM to my first PC by pressing IC'S into the PCB: 24-16 k chips to add 384 k to my 640 for a total of 1 Megabyte of ram. This is why I say that regardless of hurdles Autel is taking the easy way out, putting extra work on end users and introducing risk where it's uncalled for.

sw wasn't new but sw update was new from a consumer perspective. as far as I can remember, it wasn't common to have the customer update the sw in their consumer electronics in the 90s. I don't recall any vcrs or televisions or cameras that delivered new features or fixed bugs with new sw unless you took it to a service center or the oem. there was certainly no over the air updates and pretty sure you couldn't do it over the wire or even with a usb it was the exception. this doesn't apply to computers obviously.

and then when it finally came along (especially for mobile phones) in the 2000s (my timing could be off), like I said earlier, the process was horrendous and risky...but I'm sure you remember it well. today for the average consumer point of view, it's a blessing. is there a lot of work to be done, sure. still, I think you will find the vast majority of consumers still do not perform sw updates on their personal electronics and that includes drones.

 

[BlairAir]

Agree on several points, especially consumers not touching FW updates or even being aware of them. I've been updating stuff so long it's all a blur as far as when OTA on phones started lol. I was one who not only rooted my phones (HTC, Samsung, etc) but got really annoyed when Carriers tried locking them down. AT&T & Verizon were the worst. They claimed that as long as it ran on their network, they needed more control than the end user. Who paid for the device, and funded their network. Right. Except phone enthusiasts and techies were such a small percentage of the customer base, they didn't give a crap. Fun times, lol!