Hackaday Discussion with Chip

Did anyone take part? I just missed it :(

Anything interesting?
Any link to the chat?
My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
Website: www.clusos.com
Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)

Comments

  • 30 Comments sorted by Date Added Votes
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 9,668
    edited May 5 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Ray,

    It's today May 5 US at 12:00 Pacific Time.
    Infernal Machine
  • This is a live interview?
    Any link? Before it's over.
  • ercoerco Posts: 18,327
    edited May 5 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Mexcellent, sounds like a great way tequila half-hour. Cinqo de Mayo has always been Chip-friendly. This is Natcho average ardweeny discussion, so every Juan grab a margarita and tune in to hear Chip taco bout the P2! Remember it's today, not tamale!
    "When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

    - Pablo Picasso
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 12,738
    Publison wrote: »
    Ray,

    It's today May 5 US at 12:00 Pacific Time.
    Oops. Googled the conversion but thought it was 5pm here. S/be 5am tomorrow :)
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
    Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
  • I really like Chip's response about target markets. His reply was "the Propeller 2 is for PEOPLE" which made a lot of sense.

    Ken Gracey
  • jmgjmg Posts: 10,345
    Ken Gracey wrote: »
    I really like Chip's response about target markets. His reply was "the Propeller 2 is for PEOPLE" which made a lot of sense.

    I like this line too... (may need a teensy edit.. ;) )

    "That's a limitation of the fab process, 180nm, which is 19 years old, but Parallax can afford to use. It costs about $250 to get to production if your Verilog is done."

  • Like a little old lady clutching the Parallax financials in her hands, I'm acutely aware that Chip's estimate was [accidentally] off by a factor of 1,000x. But we all knew what he was talking about, except for a few who were quickly writing their fabless ASIC business plans.

    Ken Gracey
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 12,738
    Chip was just talking in thousands.

    Just like you say a house is worth 500. We actually mean $500K = $500,000. Everyone knows you can't buy a house for 500 dollars don't they??? ;)
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
    Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
  • Ken Gracey wrote: »
    I really like Chip's response about target markets. His reply was "the Propeller 2 is for PEOPLE" which made a lot of sense.
    Are there any estimates on when the PEOPLE will be able to get a Propeller 2?
  • Dave Hein wrote: »
    Are there any estimates on when the PEOPLE will be able to get a Propeller 2?

    Power to the PEOPLE! I think we're getting close as Chip says he's basically done. However, I've been here before and it's very important that the P2 design team on the forums continue to encourage completion over optimization. The remaining tasks are still significant but we've also achieved them before (synthesis, fabrication, documentation, software). Finishing the Propeller 2 is more about providing Chip with true project management support at this stage, along with proper financial backing. As the project has taken many years the expenses have also accumulated (and been paid for), but we will need some additional capital to wrap it up. I'd say that completion is a function of providing capital as much as Chip's work, so some attention is shifting that direction too.

    I'm not sure when it will be completed until we publish an internal schedule. I feel that we are ready to do that.

    Ken Gracey

  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 19,537
    That all very good to hear Ken.

    I'm just off to Fry's to buy some Parallax goodies. A little capital injection :)
  • Hey Ken, thanks for using the pic of my new boards, fame at last! ;-)

    A couple of the reasons I use Propeller in most of my applications is the relative ease of development and this forum and it's people which is a great resource.

    The Propeller 2 whenever it is released will be in great company!
  • It's feeling done. There just isn't much to hone that does not also shake the design up, or trigger another feature.

    Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball! @opengeekorg ---> Be Excellent To One Another SKYPE = acuity_doug
    Parallax colors simplified: http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?123709-Commented-Graphics_Demo.spin<br>
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 5,278
    edited May 6 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Ken Gracey wrote: »
    I'd say that completion is a function of providing capital as much as Chip's work, so some attention is shifting that direction too.
    I'd be willing to pay a portion of the $250 foundry cost. Oh wait, that was $250k wasn't it. :) Maybe it's time for a Kickstarter campaign. I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on a real P2.

  • Heater. wrote: »
    That all very good to hear Ken.

    I'm just off to Fry's to buy some Parallax goodies. A little capital injection :)

    Thank you, Heater. While that purchase was very valuable to us, I'd like to ask that you revisit Fry's about 1,000x in the next two days and make the same purchase again and again. I'll make sure they have inventory!

    Ken Gracey
  • Dave Hein wrote: »
    Ken Gracey wrote: »
    I'd say that completion is a function of providing capital as much as Chip's work, so some attention is shifting that direction too.
    I'd be willing to pay a portion of the $250 foundry cost. Oh wait, that was $250k wasn't it. :) Maybe it's time for a Kickstarter campaign. I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on a real P2.

    Kickstarter is a possibility. Nothing is being ruled out at this stage. The options depend on what's palatable to Chip's style of working.

    Ken Gracey

  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 19,537
    Ah, Ken, I think there is only so much I can sneak past the boss onto our San Jose project budget whilst I'm here :(

  • mmmmm,
    "people's microprocessor", "power to the people".
    Sounding a little anti-establishment and revolutionary here.
    Keep it up, I like it!
    What about SPIN, the forgotten and neglected people's language?
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 19,537
    Be sure Spin is not being neglected and is being taken forward. See the discussions in the P2 category here.
  • Coley wrote: »
    Hey Ken, thanks for using the pic of my new boards, fame at last! ;-)

    Now that was weird...I saw that pic and immediately thought of you....tell us more, bud.
    PropBASIC ROCKS!
  • Mickster wrote: »
    Coley wrote: »
    Hey Ken, thanks for using the pic of my new boards, fame at last! ;-)

    Now that was weird...I saw that pic and immediately thought of you....tell us more, bud.

    It's a very simple i/o board, something specific for work, I could have used a PIC instead but why would I when I'm happy with Prop!
    I've made it because the only other product of it's type in the marketplace is more expensive and very limited so I thought I could do a better job myself.
    This was just the first batch but I'm looking to redesign it now, same footprint but with more capabilities and go all surface mount.

  • macrobeak wrote: »
    mmmmm,
    "people's microprocessor", "power to the people".
    Sounding a little anti-establishment and revolutionary here.
    Keep it up, I like it!
    What about SPIN, the forgotten and neglected people's language?

    Chip has Spin at the forefront of his planning as he works on the language. It is a top priority in Propeller 2.

    Your concern probably relates to the visibility of C in our educational system, coupled with a clear focus from Parallax over Spin. Had we more quickly produced the next Propeller (1B, or P2) then you'd likely see Spin as a primary focus since it's the main language used in all high-volume Propeller designs. Both languages are important in different markets we serve. As P2 nears completion you will see a focus on Spin as we more effectively figure out how to segment our customers properly and give them all what they want.

    Blockly wouldn't have been possible without the C libraries we developed. The educational customers want what they want, not what we wanted to give them in the past. Sometimes we have latitude to create markets; other times we don't.

    Ken Gracey

  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 12,738
    Spin2 is going to fly on the P2 !!!

    The pasm code will really help all types of interpreters too. So we should see some interesting interpreters as well as Basic. :) :) :)
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
    Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
  • Coley wrote: »
    Mickster wrote: »
    Coley wrote: »
    Hey Ken, thanks for using the pic of my new boards, fame at last! ;-)

    Now that was weird...I saw that pic and immediately thought of you....tell us more, bud.

    It's a very simple i/o board, something specific for work, I could have used a PIC instead but why would I when I'm happy with Prop!
    I've made it because the only other product of it's type in the marketplace is more expensive and very limited so I thought I could do a better job myself.
    This was just the first batch but I'm looking to redesign it now, same footprint but with more capabilities and go all surface mount.

    Cool, love the rugged terminals, are they WAGO?
    You still using PropBasic?

    PropBASIC ROCKS!
  • Admittedly, I haven't followed the P2 development very closely:

    What's the skinny on the (very understated) quad decode capability. We have digital filtering, right?

    And the 8bit DACs; was I dreaming or did I read mention of a technique (dithering?) that could produce an effective 16bits?
    PropBASIC ROCKS!
  • jmgjmg Posts: 10,345
    Mickster wrote: »
    What's the skinny on the (very understated) quad decode capability. We have digital filtering, right?
    Quad Counters tend to have inbuilt filtering, if that is what you meant ?
    Mickster wrote: »
    And the 8bit DACs; was I dreaming or did I read mention of a technique (dithering?) that could produce an effective 16bits?
    There is usually no free lunch. Dithering can 'soften the steps' but if the steps are non-linear, you will come in a long way short of 16b.
  • MicksterMickster Posts: 969
    edited May 9 Vote Up0Vote Down
    jmg wrote: »
    Mickster wrote: »
    What's the skinny on the (very understated) quad decode capability. We have digital filtering, right?
    Quad Counters tend to have inbuilt filtering, if that is what you meant ?

    No. Devices such as the 7366 (that, I believe, you brought to my attention) and MC's "QEI" deem a pulse to be valid only if it persists for several clock cycles.

    Edit: Oh, maybe that is what you are referring to....I think I misread. LOL.
    PropBASIC ROCKS!
Sign In or Register to comment.