More complex does not make it better. The point is to create something with as few components as possible to get a high level of reliability and performance.

The high complexity is most likely a sign of someone using standard generally available mask components and configure them to emulate the FTDI chip, or even a FPGA, PIC or similar. It does in no way make it better.

And all of them suffer clones, FTDI today, the rest tomorrow.

I also understand their stance since the clones do cost them reputation when they don't work as they should.

But you aren't a FTDI user, you are a user of a counterfeit device that happens to lure the OS to load a FTDI driver.

If anything - shun Chinese fake products.

That's only working into the hands of the counterfeit chip producers.

The problem isn't the real FTDI chips, it is those that leeches on property (PID/VID) purchased by FTDI with substandard equipment/chips.

If this causes a backlash of a lot of devices ending up in warranty claims due to non-functionality or DOA (Dead on arrival) then it will definitely hurt the counterfeiters.

That doesn't always work.

The problem is that the fake chips are sometimes injected into batches of real chips, and it costs money to test the validity of every chip on the production line. If the standard driver borks the fake chips on the production line then they will fail tests and go into the junk bin. If the junk bin overflows with borked devices due to fake chips then it will definitely go back the food chain.

In which case the customer will turn back to the shop where they bought the device and claim it to be faulty. Is this within the usual 12 month warranty period (which is mandatory in many countries) a lot of customers would come back to that supplier with warranty claims.

After that - well, can't get everything.

However it was their ID to use and work with as they like.

So are the FTDI and Prolific clones. Extremely flakey.

Until someone writes a driver for it.

Not in the UK. One instance or multiple don't usually cause a multiplicatory effect.

I don't have a problem with FTDI technology itself, the problem is with the hardware clones.

But FTDI could have taken a different route and instead show an annoying pop-up or only allow 300bps on counterfeit chips. That would work until the counterfeit chip makers goes so far in their work to create a clone that it would cost as much as the real thing at which time it's useless.

And the names of the people mentioned in the article both have odd names.

Citron = Lemon in Swedish.

At least for someone Swedish it's hard to take this article entirely serious.

We reboot the users that complains instead.

I can't help but agree here...

The back-room chips are often not performing very well either.

It's actually amazing that they can put the back-room chips on the market - they need to work with some interesting channels to make that work. I have only had problems when there have been clone chips in devices. If they can make a chip then they should be able to make a decent driver for it as well instead.