Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Mixed feelings ! finally disappointed... — Parallax Forums

Mixed feelings ! finally disappointed...

AltamiraAltamira Posts: 1
edited 2008-08-26 02:21 in Propeller 1
Maybe someone will contradict me and hopefully I will be a happy camper !

I tried and used several embedded controller from the PIC to Cubloc to many others devices since
the last 10 years.

The fun part

I was at first very exited reading about the features of the Propeller; Especially the multiple cogs
feature.

I ordered a study kit and started to work. The learning curve is quite fast since I don't need a lot
of training about electronics and the processor itself is very straightforward.

So I fool around recreating or revisiting old projects to realize how easier it would have been if
I had a Propeller back then and Spin to program it.

The Propeller is really a powerful tool that is easy to implement and to me supersedes a lot
of embedded controllers on the market.

The sad part

Unfortunately, this is not a picture perfect world and I soon realized the limitation of such device.

Nowadays, many business venture in different projects by building on the community of users to make
their product better. Parallax is no different and Propeller is a good example.

They release product too early, with little in house testing and the put the burden of development
on future users (pioneers) of the products. Some of them become gurus, some just quit by lack
of guidance.

One thing I realized very soon, the Object exchange is a good source of examples but far from
being a solid "bible like" reference. You can find many different approach to this or that but not
a "manufacturer's solution" or "cookbook".

I would have really liked a section of object directly and purposely made by Parallax with their
seal of approval. Not the solution from "Joe This" or "Joe That".

I believe that relying solely on a community of users to develop programming is a big mistake and
also somewhat of an insult to those who purchased a not free nor "open source" product.

Specific basic routines/objects should be developed and tested by Parallax and made available. These
would include, but not limited to:

-I/O and sensors interfaces
-Display and debug
-I2C, SPI, etc
-Timing, timer and counters
-Number conversions and string manipulation
-Memory functions

Also, general programming guidelines for different situations that people are regularly faced with. As
a rule of thumb, if users place a post here on the same topic 5 or 6 times, there might be a need to
include that in the documentation.

It's really not normal to make a "forum" the main source for documenting a product. After a while, the
product manual need to be updated and the information made "mainstream".

In comparison, the Basic Stamp development is not plagued by such problems. I find it much better
to use what's there and the manuals; The forum is only there to discuss minor issues and ideas.

Conclusion

I would really users here to comment my post. Please post constructive comments rather that shoot
at the messenger. I strongly believe that there should come out benefits by having something more
structured at Parallax on the Propeller subject.

Comments

  • Sniper KingSniper King Posts: 221
    edited 2008-08-23 23:48
    Though i agree with some of what you are saying, I am excited to have such a valuable tool as the forum to answer questions from the simple to the hard.· I am sure at this point I have managed to get people to hide from me as I post questions and requests very often.smilewinkgrin.gif··

    you are right, it would be cool to have some objects that are created by the designers themselves.· However, the collective mind of this forum has more than once went way outside the box and created fantastic projects and software applications that may not have been done without the forum.· Two Words...Propeller Radio.· Would that have come about without the forum.· i doubt it.· I have used many of the objects and once I learned them I have not had any problems with them.·

    Certainly, the learning curve of the propeller has discouraged some.· Even me.· I have complained on the forums more than once for a Floating Point tutorial.· I finally said screw-it and wrote my own as I learned it.· People popped in and made observations to my code and I made the appropriate changes.·

    I have to say that this method of learning, to me, has been refreshing compared to the reference manual approach that will leave you with huge questions that will be hard to answer.· the knowledge base of this forum is the best reference manual I have used and when I have a question, it is usually answered in a matter of minutes.

    Parallax vs. some other chip manufacturer

    Parallax everyday and twice on sunday!yeah.gif

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    ·- Ouch, thats not suppose to be hot!··


    Michael King
    Application Engineer
    R&D
    Digital Technology Group
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2008-08-24 00:10
    I take issue with a lot of your comments / conclusions:

    1) The Propeller was not released "too early". I was not there at Parallax, but the Propeller and the Propeller Tool were tested extensively and have been much more reliable and robust than many competing products from much larger companies. Look at the errata sheets for various PICs from Microchip for example. There are some serious problems with some of the devices. Most of them can be overcome with work-arounds, but many of them are non-trivial. The Spin compiler and Propeller assembler have proven to be very robust. Most of the modifications to it have been extensions to the assembler, not bug fixes. The IDE has had some problems, but none of them (that I recall) have been anywhere near critical.

    2) A number of basic I/O drivers were ready at the time the Propeller was officially released, some of them very sophisticated. In particular, the TV and VGA drivers and the PS/2 keyboard and mouse drivers, the FullDuplexSerial driver were all done and are essentially unchanged since then.

    3) Parallax has a long history of relying on the user community to develop programs, I/O drivers, documentation, etc. Many in this community are very skilled and experienced and are willing to contribute their efforts for others to use. One outstanding example is the floating point library for the Propeller. Parallax is a small company with limited resources. Building and maintaining a loyal, generous user base is a very cost effective way to multiply the limited resources and provide quality support for I/O devices and applications that have very very low volume prospects in terms of business.

    4) The Basic Stamp has been around for many years and the large existing base of documentation and tutorials have been developed slowly, again with very limited resources. The rate of development of Propeller tutorials has been faster (as far as I can tell) than that of the Stamp and I have no doubt that it will continue.

    5) As the use of the internet has grown, forums have indeed become very important for support and documentation. There is already a list of changes / enhancements to be made to the Propeller Manual for the next edition derived mostly from comments from forum members. Parallax cannot afford to reprint the existing Manual too often and the Manual's editor has many tasks to do, not just the one Manual.

    6) There is not one solution to any given problem and what appear to be similar problems may require very different solutions, particularly with such a general purpose tool as the Propeller. The richness of the Object Exchange allows a user to pick the "best" solution for their needs and does sometimes require them to modify what's available for their specific circumstances. This is not at all different from the "white papers" or application notes put out by larger chip houses. They're meant to be worked examples and, although sometimes the solution can be used "as is", it's not expected to be used verbatim.

    Post Edited (Mike Green) : 8/24/2008 12:16:46 AM GMT
  • waltcwaltc Posts: 158
    edited 2008-08-24 00:27
    The only things I was disappointed with was the Prop manual which is in need of revision and that the chip didn't come with a compiler but a one of a kind interpretive language.

    The latter I thought was just bizarre given that Parallax is trying to position the Prop beyond the hobbyist/basic stamp crowd.

    I hope when the Prop II is released Parallax does something like Microchip did with their latest 32bit offering - include a C based development suite with the dev board.

    Lastly its the users of microcontrollers that eventually make most of the software and documentation contributions once the chip is out. If they like the chip, it can have a long life like the 80x51 family or some the Freescale 8-16 bitters with a massive software base and brainshare.

    Or it can end up in the junk pile.
  • Erik FriesenErik Friesen Posts: 1,071
    edited 2008-08-24 00:41
    Another thing about the propeller ide is that it is all you need! No patch in this- use this other program- press compile- then if it loads - you can program your chip. Plus you don't have 5 external program files to get right so that the compiler issues a command that tells you message 153234 line 543 bla bla.
  • WhitWhit Posts: 4,191
    edited 2008-08-24 00:41
    Though I am brand new to the Propeller - I am extremely impressed by what it can do and by the great amount of information available here from Parallax, and the generosity of fellow users.

    Part of the reason that I have the Propeller and other Parallax products and enjoy Robotics and Electronics in general is that I enjoy learning and exploring their use.

    I have yet to buy any powerful tool that used itself. I appreciate the way so many here will help without actually giving you the answer.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Whit+


    "We keep moving forward, opening new doors, and doing new things, because we're curious and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths." - Walt Disney
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2008-08-24 00:42
    Parallax simply does not have the resources to develop their own C development suite. They may package ImageCraft's suite, maybe at the educational price, with the development board. If one of the forum members has the time and interest to produce a C compiler, that might be available for free, but it won't likely be the same quality as ImageCraft's.
  • ElectricAyeElectricAye Posts: 4,561
    edited 2008-08-24 00:47
    I have to agree with a lot of what Altamira is saying. My biggest gripe is that a lot of the objects in the Object Exchange are not very well commented, so it's hard to follow - and even worse to learn from. Of course, I am very grateful to those who contribute to the Object Exchange, but it does seem to me that Parallax is relying too heavily on volunteers to provide objects that are fundamental to getting the Prop up and running. Object oriented language depends on documentation to be truly effective. Otherwise, we are stuck snaking our way through each and every object to find out its limitations, quirks, etc. Although this might all seem easy for experienced users, it's like... like driving in Boston for the rest of us. All the locals know their way around, but for any outsider who enters it, it's a nightmare of one way streets that are poorly marked - if marked at all. I get that pioneer feeling, too, when I'm trying to find information about the Prop, and so my last resort is just to post to the forum and pray that somebody will come to my rescue. The forum has been great in helping out, but I would be a lot less of a nuisance here (maybe) if Parallax just had a batch of well-documented objects that were blessed by the company via extensive testing. Such a treatment for the Prop would help launch it out of being a hobbyist item and really get newbies like me sucked into its potentials so deeply that we would never escape. I'm guessing there are gazillions of mechanical, chemical, biological, and other non-EE types out there who would love to have the flexibility of making their own instruments cheaply and quickly, if only they had a modular, well-documented way of entering into the world of microprocessors. The Prop has that potential, I think, but right now, for noobs, it's a struggle.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    It might be the Information Age but the Eon of Ignorance has yet to end.
  • jazzedjazzed Posts: 11,803
    edited 2008-08-24 01:19
    Obex code is free in the open source spirit. You get what you pay for ... usually.

    I have only been "put off" by one user project suggestion for freeware because of the difficulty and inordinate amount of time that would have been required. For the most part the big guns here can do anything (and one can do it all about 3x faster than anyone else).

    For the most part though forum members or Parallax, directly or indirectly, asking us to take on projects allows us to generate value add in a "partnership" which can become a profit center. If you develop unique commercial or consumer grade embedded products, Parallax might even offer it for sale if it's manufacturable or otherwise produceable.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    --Steve
  • QuattroRS4QuattroRS4 Posts: 916
    edited 2008-08-24 01:54
    Altamira,
    Firstly as you are relatively new to the Propeller - Welcome.

    With regard to your points -

    1) Released 'too early' with little inhouse testing - not so ... Read 'Why the propeller works'
    www.parallax.com/dl/docs/article/WhythePropellerWorks.pdf
    8 years in Development .. to ensure all the usual pitfalls all too common with 'other brand' offerings are avoided..

    2) With regard to your preferred 'bible like' reference re[noparse]:o[/noparse]bjects .. and different approaches ...
    I am sure that I am not alone here in saying that the many different approaches as you have observed in the
    Object exchange is a major plus . There are many ways to skin a cat .. some approaches suit a given application
    better than others .When observing the methods used in some of these objects they can trigger a thought and possible
    solution to something entirely different. IMO this is one of the great things about the Propeller and the OBEX.

    3)Relying Soley on Users to develop and Opensource - That is entirely up to the user and forum members..Usually it is just guidance an perhaps a snippet of code to help ..I feel that the Parallax approach lends itself to a sense of community and often asks for input and feedback and is appreciative of all responses. It gives me,at least, the sense of involvement - reading other contributions can be quite beneficial. This too is a benefit. I am not sure where your Open Source comment has relevance ..

    4)As Mike has said 'The Internet has Grown' and yes many of the 'other brands' have forums - none without exception are as busy,friendly or informative about their product as this one. When the propeller was just released I was developing a product for an industrial application and was burning the candle at both ends - I encountered an issue I posted on the forum - there was a few replies within 15mins and issue was resolved.. Which I ask is better a) Email techsupport@otherbrand.com and hope that you will get a 'meaningful reply' within a couple of days or b) Get the issue resolved immediately by group of people that are second to none with a wide knowledge base..

    Regards,
    John Twomey

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    'Necessity is the mother of invention'
  • PyrotomPyrotom Posts: 84
    edited 2008-08-24 02:25
    Given the choice between having Chip and his crew work on more objects and documentation for the Propellor or concentrate on getting the Propellor 2 out the door, I know where my preference lies. I am an experienced programmer, but obviously none of my previous experience was in Spin or PASM. But I found them both easy to learn, especially once the user's manual was finished. smile.gif

    I think that the forum provides an excellent source of information, and I hope that the Parallax team keeps up the great work they have been doing, and does not feel they have to spend too much time holding the hands of their customer base. After all, they have Mike Green to do that! smile.gif
  • PaulPaul Posts: 263
    edited 2008-08-24 02:53
    I'll have to agree that the documentation and code in the object exchange leaves something to be desired. I'm convinced every time you start a project you will need to delete everything from your parallax/propeller folder and start with a fresh download of the IDE and all the function you will need from the object exchange. This is because you never know when some little quirk has been fixed. I just spent four hours getting BS2.RCtime to read a thermistor. I finally had to 'fix' the BS2Function. I'm sure it's been fixed in the latest version.

    I don't like bugging other people. Period. This stuff should work. There should be adequate documentation. The Manual isn't even indexed.

    Great processor, Great IDE, A year and a half and only one app. note?

    Paul

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Propeller Wiki Rocks! - propeller.wikispaces.com
  • hippyhippy Posts: 1,981
    edited 2008-08-24 03:54
    There's a phenomenal amount of information for the Basic Stamp but that has been developed over many years by many people and it's a bit unrealistic to expect there to be the same level of material at the present time.

    I come from a background and era where all one got was a chip and a manufacturer's data sheet, minimal example code and nothing close to a tutorial so I've been quite happy with a largely learn as you go experience for the Propeller. But I can appreciate there is another group which wants to be able to plug objects and code together and be helped through the development process more.

    ElectricAye is probably right; there are lots of non-EE types who would love to put systems together like Lego(TM) and be easy to use for non-experts and the Propeller isn't ideally positioned for that at the current time. In truth few products are, the Basic Stamp has perhaps been an exception and to an extent this may have led to some expectations which cannot currently be fulfilled.

    I can sympathise with those who do feel out of their depth with the Propeller and feel let down by lack of support material, but to the best of my knowledge no one ever claimed a Propeller would be as easy to use as a Basic Stamp or that anyone could walk in from the street and use it without having to climb a learning curve.
  • ElectricAyeElectricAye Posts: 4,561
    edited 2008-08-24 04:14
    I guess my point is this: the Basic Stamp has a reputation for being extremely accessible, which is why it is used by kids in high school, etc. But the Basic Stamp, from my perspective, is little more than a toy. On the other hand, the Prop is a whole different story. This thing can rock! Parallel processing makes a world of difference, not to mention its greater speed. So if Parallax would/could capitalize on their reputation for creating very accessible products, non-EEs like me could easily graduate from toying around to kicking some butt. It would be a smart investment for Parallax to sift through the mountains of forum inputs, etc. and provide a more disciplined documentation. The community of Prop users would/could therefore explode, meaning that more people could contribute their knowledge and techniques from a wide variety of backgrounds and applications. Right now they are effectively preaching to the choir about the virtues of Prop. What they need to do, in my humble opinion, is market this thing as something quite accessible to scientists, etc. who need to make cheap, customized electronics for data aquisition, automation, etc. Maybe I'm delusional about this, but it's all about communication. People like me can drive pretty good, but at the very least I need a map I can read while driving. Having to stop every 30 or 40 feet to ask directions or sift through mounds of downloads kinda causes a guy to look for other ways of getting to the goal.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    It might be the Information Age but the Eon of Ignorance has yet to end.
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2008-08-24 04:34
    Just more disciplined documentation and marketing won't get people started with a very sophisticated processor like the Propeller. There's a learning curve involved unless you're someone with a lot of experience with a wide variety of hardware and software that can just pick up a new processor and its development tools from the manual. The Propeller Education Kit (PEK) is a very nice introduction to a variety of concepts and can get a lot of people started with Spin and the Propeller even though it's a work in progress. How many people do you think are willing to work through the tutorials and examples? For the Basic Stamps, the Stamps in Class tutorials have to be worked through. For the Propeller, you need to start with the PEK tutorials and the Propeller Manual. The Hydra Manual and the Hydra SD expansion card manual are also very good introductions to the hardware and programming concepts for the TV, PS/2 keyboard and mouse and the SD card I/O.

    There are some 3rd party books under development that should also be very good introductions to the Propeller as well. I'm not sure when you'll see them, but it'll probably be early 2009.

    Post Edited (Mike Green) : 8/24/2008 4:44:21 AM GMT
  • ElectricAyeElectricAye Posts: 4,561
    edited 2008-08-24 05:27
    Thanks Mike,
    But it looks like the download version of the HYDRA SD-MAX Storage Card manual only provides a sample, giving only pages up to page 22-ish. Looks the same for the Hydra manual, bits and pieces available for free. Not that I'm complaining that I can't get a freebie that tutors me on things like this. I know there's a learning curve. Two months ago I knew doodly squat about the Propeller or object oriented language, and now I'm close to getting a system working that measures 8 channels of temperature and 6 channels counting frequencies and displaying it all on a TV and hopefully stores it on an SD card and writes it into an Excel sheet. It's just been frustrating getting information from readable sources. You and others have been a terrific help, but the Parallax documentation proper, if it exists, is so scattered and cryptic. I feel like Indiana Jones trying to decipher the glyphs, snakes curling at my feet, torch blown out by every twist of wind.... I want a bible, darn it, not boxes full of tree bark, sheep's skin, and camel hooves covered in uncommented codes...

    Have I whined enough?

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    It might be the Information Age but the Eon of Ignorance has yet to end.
  • SRLMSRLM Posts: 5,045
    edited 2008-08-24 05:35
    As to the Obex: perhaps Parallax could shift through the exchange and choose the most functional/best objects in each section, and polish them up and give an 'approved' seal. I know that the objects are all good for slightly different things, but there are some that are better than others. This half-development style would allow Parallax to keep costs low and quality high.

    Oh, and there's a reason why the all the short advertising sections about the Propeller say that it's recomended for experienced programmers. It takes a while to get everything down.
  • evanhevanh Posts: 15,657
    edited 2008-08-24 07:07
    Heh, The title had me worried there was a problem for a bit.
  • Graham StablerGraham Stabler Posts: 2,510
    edited 2008-08-24 10:46
    I don't feel in any way parallax released too early or have put too much burden on the user, they produced a fully working chip and IDE and plenty of awesome objects and have simply encouraged sharing between users.

    As far as objects go I am very happy that we can actually have them at all. I use them as is without understanding (just use the functions) or I use them as inspiration for my own code. I think it is a shame the parallax objects are not well commented (to an instructive level) as I have said before but it is not the end of the world.

    I suspect you find the basic stamp easier because it is easier and no one has ever pretended that the propeller would not be harder to learn it's just so much more powerful and hence complex.

    Graham
  • Timothy D. SwieterTimothy D. Swieter Posts: 1,613
    edited 2008-08-25 17:00
    If I can add my thoughts to this conversation.

    Parallax provides high quality products with documentaiton that evolves over times to be the best. (Usually the documentation starts very well and then continues to improve with age). The feat of creating the Propeller and what the Propeller means to an industry is huge. There is a shift in thinking required to see Parallax, the Propeller and the changes in the embedded industry.

    I got to meet Chip and Paul Baker this past weekend. These are two wonderful guys. After talking with them, I can see why only "so much" has been done. Like others have said, Parallax is a growing, resource constrained company like all the other businesses out there. Paul was telling me how is role in the company is changing so that he is more dedicated to supporting the propeller, creating app notes, and helping out on the forum. Your compliments and complaints don't go unheard at Parallax, they just can't respond to everything.

    It takes a while for a community to grow and for standard objects to be tested and published. As a community we can form and development standard objects like an SPI or I2C or other.

    I am working with the Prop in a commercial product. The product needs to be pass FCC and I ran into some noise trouble. When I brought the problem up and discussed with with both Paul and Chip, I am very pleased with the help and support. I love the small company feel because I am talking with the man himself that designed the IC and he knows better than anyone about the noise issue I am having and how best to mitigate it. If we try to compare this level of support with the many other MCU companies you can list, you won't find anything this good. So there is a tradeoff in a small company. In time the community and Parallax will keep filling in the void.

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    Timothy D. Swieter, E.I.

    www.brilldea.com·- Prop Blade, LED Painter, RGB LEDs, uOLED-IOC, eProto fo SunSPOT, BitScope
    www.sxmicro.com - a blog·exploring the SX micro
    www.tdswieter.com
  • mikestefoymikestefoy Posts: 84
    edited 2008-08-25 17:41
    here are a couple of thoughts, not well considered, but meant well.

    1. I really like Parallax and their philosophy ( my general opinion)


    2. I have 3 protoboards, 2x 96oled's, and imagecraft's C compiler demo ( I have a purchased ARM C compiler from Richard).

    After 4 or 5 months, I can honestly say, I have not yet powered-up any of the stuff i bought or downloaded.


    Richard Man is correct in his recent posts on the viabilty of his C compiler on propeller.


    The propeller in my opinion is a "Curio"


    I really want to find an application, and reason to use the prop, as I still believe that it is a special, and unique product, borne from a creative mind.


    The prop has 2 special features over and above a PIC/ARM/AVR/MSP430


    1. very fast ( useful at Video frequencies and above)

    2. multiple parallel processors ( which are beneficial at those high frequencies)


    the prop is not good for low frequency 1ms or lower processing that a 1$ PIC can do.


    I also note that Beau is still mentioning 40mA as an output capability, which is at best naive, and at worst misleading ( i have had a few set-to's with Paul about this).


    I genuinely see a point and purpose to the Prop chip, but not for battery charging/Solar power controller/50Hz/60Hz PWM type stuff.

    I genuinely am in awe of Mike Green/Rayman etc, who have much higher brain cell capacity than I.

    I look forward to finding an application that drags me to use the prop.

    please dont flame me. I really like the prop, but i doesnt fit the bill for me yet.

    Mike
  • Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
    edited 2008-08-25 17:49
    One of the comments in this thread was a reference to the Propeller
    being like Boston, a place the locals know, but has many unmarked roads
    for anyone who is new in town.

    I don't think it's quite that bad, but I can certainly see the potential for this,
    and have been working on materials to place "cardboard signs" to help
    direct lost traffic. (my .sig below)

    Now that the Expo is in the Bag, it's time to get back in the shop and back
    behind my Word Processor to crank out more stuff. [noparse]:)[/noparse]

    OBC

    ▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
    New to the Propeller?

    Getting started with a Propeller Protoboard?
    Check out: Introduction to the Proboard & Propeller Cookbook 1.4
    Updates to the Cookbook are now posted to: Propeller.warrantyvoid.us
    Got an SD card connected? - PropDOS
  • Fred HawkinsFred Hawkins Posts: 997
    edited 2008-08-25 17:57
    Altamira,

    'Shrinking' your problems down to a thumbnail, you've hit your first plateau. That's where one attempts to translate the entire world into Propeller-dom, instead of using a prop to do one thing right now. Lots of us have hit this same spot and spend weeks or months categorizing lists of stuff. Eventually we all learn to Relax and use the google forum search for what we need, not what we think we need for some idealized encyclopedic comprehension. If you can't find it using google, ask the forum, and like a magic hat sometimes you get a working answer. Sometimes you don't but that's chiefly because not enough people are out on that particular skinny branch.

    Alternatively, you want to use a prop to make money by providing solutions. So do it and quit whining. The prop is just two years on the market, its story arch will never be the same as a Fortune 500 deep pockets' product. For most of us (including, I suspect, Parallax's people), therein lies the fun.

    two cents freely submitted,
    Fred
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2008-08-25 18:18
    mikestefoy,
    Your feelings have been voiced before by others. Nobody here expects that the Propeller will be the solution for everything or even a small percentage of that. It shines at some applications, is overkill for some, and is underpowered for some. It can be used for a lot of projects where a PIC would work nicely and may simplify the work because of the multiple processors or allow user interaction via keyboard and display that would be difficult to do with a PIC. There are other projects where a different solution might require multiple chips or where something like an SX or PIC would just barely get the job done and any kind of future enhancement would require a complete redesign.
  • mikestefoymikestefoy Posts: 84
    edited 2008-08-25 18:32
    MikeG,

    thanks for your warm reply.

    I do understand the benefits of the prop over a PIC etc.

    Its just that I havent found my application yet.

    I didnt buy my prop bits and bobs out of a desire to make Chip wealthy, it was that I new that sometime I would find a compelling need for speed/parellelism.

    I am really looking forward to getting me teeth into prop ( having spent 5 years in PIC PASM , and another 10 years in C in PIC and ARM)



    MikeW
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2008-08-25 18:54
    I'm a big proponent of modest "overkill". I generally steer Stamp users to a BS2p/pe/px rather than just a BS2. Usually the incremental cost is small and the option of using "fancy" statements and extra memory is nice to have in case a project ends up a little bit bigger than you anticipated. It's much better to have unused features that you can use if you need than to run short. Similarly, a Protoboard is really quite cheap once you figure in the regulators, EEPROM, and crystal. You can't get a Stamp for that price for goodness sakes!

    If you're planning on high volume, pennies count and everything shifts. There, the amount of time you spend in development, shaving bytes, shaving performance margins, etc. is small compared to the production and parts costs. We're not talking about that for the Propeller.

    Why not use a Propeller for battery charging/Solar power controller/50Hz/60Hz PWM type stuff? You might find that you can implement features that are difficult to do with a smaller microcontroller or you might save on some external components.
  • Mike_GTNMike_GTN Posts: 106
    edited 2008-08-25 21:32
    This will all become like everyother battle on everyother forum when we start talking about processors. This is my take on things, yes the Propeller is more complex and possibly not the correct jumpstart from the Basic Stamp. Parallax are all things to all people, they do great education texts as well as sales! I do not recall the last time asked for some free samples from a Semiconductor company and also wanted someone to install them for me. They do provide some excellent resources already (freely given as well)

    I believe all the required resources are there already, some a little tricky to find at times, I consider this forum to be the best resource of all. You can talk with the people that work at Parallax and have a real insight in to the product. If you have a problem with an Object in understanding how to drive it, just ask and for sure someone will have already been through the problems you are facing. People here are more than willing to give a helping hand to see this processor continue to amaze people.

    I've been doing an FPGA project for the last six months on and off, emulating a ZNA234 (just the pattern generation part) the PAL timings are picture perfect and worthy
    of an award already. What a time wasting project in real terms though. My personal education has been helped though. This is hobby stuff and never designed to make money, equally playing with the Propeller is just the same for me. It is certainly a very fun chip, but with lots of capacity to be anything you want it to be. I see this as almost digital Lego, as users we also have to learn how to put the plastic parts together though. When we fail to see how this is possible we ask. People help us, we move on and then help the next person to get over this problem.

    I do not think we should complicate it much further.

    Regards

    Mike.
  • rjo_rjo_ Posts: 1,825
    edited 2008-08-25 23:46
    As usual, I agree with everybody, especially Mike Green.

    At THE Expo, Paul Baker noted that the really good Stamp documentation and teaching materials weren't developed until several years after the stamp was on the market... and Paul had all kinds of things to say about customer support and documentation... this is not a minor issue to Parallax.

    I made the mistake of not getting Andre's book right away. I love games, know a little about them and figured that buying the book could wait until I learned a little more about the Prop... then I finally ordered it... and every subject that I had studied and only partially grasped was right there in Andre's book... it is must reading.
    If I were Parallax, I wouldn't sell a Proto board to a new user unless they had a proof of purchase for Andre's book.

    If you go back to the Prop's intro... the materials that were put out were mostly for the creme of the crop... and Parallax was warning people not to choose the Prop unless they had some deep experience (and talent). The forum at that point was a discussion among the absolute elite (with a few jokers thrown in just to make it interesting.)

    Since then the forum has exploded and now has useful information at every user level imaginable.

    The available written documentation is complete, I don't see any major holes... but the new user might still have a problem figuring out where it is.

    I think we need a flow chart for new users... "if you have electronics experience, but aren't a professional... go here" Else, "if you are a professional... the same thing is available in a 5 page blurb and you can save a lot of time by going over there." Etc. How about someone writing an applet?

    This will all happen... the important thing is to have the tools... to know that they work and that the only thing missing is your own understanding. All of the materials you could possibly need are available. That is absolutely not true for most products at any stage of their development.

    In the early days of Apple, I bought some flavor of Apple computer... don't remember which... and decided to get into imaging. Not having the time or inclination to do any actual work on the project, I hired a programmer and gave him all of the available materials from Apple... which included the programmer's series of books. I told the programmer to put a dot on the screen... 6 months later, I was still waiting for my dot. At the Expo there was a demo... and I forget the guy's name(help guys?)... The guy took his Prop of the box, ran the graphics demo... and hacked the graphics demo to make a graphic display for his motorcycle... within about an hour.

    Information overload is always a problem... the forum has so much good information on a daily basis that you can easily exhaust your time (if not your body) simply studying what is available.

    My knowledge of electronics is shall we say... limited. I'm trying but I'm still an idiot... but every time my ex-wife (and best friend) wants something technical... she asks if the Prop can do it cheaper... my answer is always "yes." So far... I have built her a GPS system for her car... by hacking the OBEX objects... and a remote control camera matrix... without having to know very much at all.

    For the camera matrix, all I needed to know is how a 5V relay works... and I needed to know how to turn a pin on and off... There is an object on the OBEX for IR remote control by Bob Belville(sp... sorry Bob)... that I barely understand, but is easy to hack... you put it all together... you have an infinitely expandable video switch.... what could be simpler?

    Parallax has a different approach to business... and it works.

    There is an exception to every rule, but as a rule the love affair between Parallax and their customers is real, not likely to change and is what really keeps the whole thing going.

    In the area of computers and electronics, the Propeller is absolutely the most important product that I have seen in the past 20 years.

    A parallel processing controller...who would have thunk it?
  • K2K2 Posts: 691
    edited 2008-08-26 02:21
    I can't relate to altamira's gripes at all. But I'm sort of an old school guy. I don't consider that the chip manufacturer is there to write my code for me. This forum is far more than what I'm used to, the free Propeller IDE is far easier to use than any IDE I've ever used before, and an actual working VGA driver, free-for-the-taking, is just plain crazy!

    Perhaps what altamira needs is a specific project and a strict deadline. That has always helped me.
Sign In or Register to comment.