I teach high school electronics in Virginia. I'm slowly (due to $$) changing from the BS2 to the propeller in my classroom. The main reason is PropBasic and the End of life for the SX. I can start kids on Basic and then move them into Spin, PASM and then "C". Cost for a Protoboard $39.00 for USB version. It is worth the extra $10 due to theft of Propplugs. The Audrino gets more·press than the propeller. Look at Nut and Volts for an example, Aurdino: Smiley's workshop monthly, Propeller once every other month. Audrino starts simple and works into a more advanced project each more or less building on the last project. Propeller: a different type of project each month, that may or may not relate to the last project. As an educator I would like a prototype board where the chip was in a socket. Then if a student fries a chip I only need to change the chip. I started with the basic Stamp for two reasons outstanding customer support and strong forum community and by adding a few parts I could more projects (BoeBot to WAM to Singals).
I understand people's desire to try many microcontrollers, in fact I'm the same way. Although I know the Parallax products best I'm forced to push myself out of my comfort zone and try other micros, such as the Pic and hopefully the Arduino later. It is truly only of benefit as more knowledge comes out of it. I was even surprised when going to tour the college I plan to attend in a year to hear that the professor considered the Propeller "too simple" to use in college, preferring to use only microcontrollers that made the programmer do everything with no shortcuts. I guess I can't blame him for that, considering how much I turn to the OBEX, but hearing that gave me all the more desire to learn more languages and figure out all there is to microcontrollers.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Pi aren't squared, pi are round. Cornbread are squared!
It is good to learn to program and become fluent in more than one language.
For as far as the class goes, the only opinion that matters in your class is that of your professor.· It is easier to go with the flow instead of·nudge your professor·because they can regulate what goes on.
pi'd said...
I'm forced to push myself out of my comfort zone and try other micros, such as the Pic and hopefully the Arduino later.
I hate to nit-pick, but this irritates me. The "PIC" is a family of processors, the "Arduino" is not. Having said that, the Atmel stuff looks reasonably nice to program, and (like the PIC) there are a gazillion simple examples out there for it.
Now, having got that off, the Arduino community has quite a head start on the Prop (years). Even RS in Europe has picked up Arduino. RS price for an "Arduino compatible" Atmel chip with the bootloader pre-programmed? 5 quid. Price for a bare Propeller? 13.50 quid. Best part was when navigating to the Propeller by doing a search for "Parallax", it showed me the microcontroller hardware picture of an Arduino board.
The Propeller is not old enough to have gained significant traction over older, more established products. It's not as cheap and it's not as easy (needs 3.3v & external eeprom). It will get there though.
Maybe someone should take a week and just scour the web looking at some of the Arduino documentation and the plethora of books available on the platform to see what people are actually using it for and how one might shape technical documentation and examples to appeal to that crowd. Of course, maybe that's already happened or in progress...
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
You only ever need two tools in life. If it moves and it shouldn't use Duct Tape. If it does not move and it should use WD40.
The Propeller is not old enough to have gained significant traction over older, more established products. It's not as cheap and it's not as easy (needs 3.3v & external eeprom). It will get there though.
I bought some cheap products from Hong Kong from an Arduino website.· They show you a picture with a mess of wires and you think you are getting a good price.· I got the product in the mail and the box was about five inches and the picture doesn't reveal it isn't to scale.· I bought a bunch of jumper wires but they weren't heavy guage.· I'll try to illustrate the problem for you.
I use to like listening to a lot of music and manufacturing started shifting to China.· My headphones wouldn't last a year or two.· They would break in less than a month.· The wire they use is braided like human hair so if you roll·the wires·up and unroll it it probably won't work because the wire breaks.· Now I buy headphones from the dollar store because they last as long as the big prices in the department stores.· It is the same or almost the same·quality wire you find in the dollar store.
The jumper wire I got appears to be the same guage.· I haven't spliced one of the wires to see what is inside.· But imagine putting it in your project and one day you don't have electrical continuity.· Then you will be debugging the circuit trying to figure out where the fault lies. ·
The Propeller is not old enough to have gained significant traction over older, more established products. It's not as cheap and it's not as easy (needs 3.3v & external eeprom). It will get there though.
I bought some cheap products from Hong Kong from an Arduino website. They show you a picture with a mess of wires and you think you are getting a good price. I got the product in the mail and the box was about five inches and the picture doesn't reveal it isn't to scale. I bought a bunch of jumper wires but they weren't heavy guage. I'll try to illustrate the problem for you.
I use to like listening to a lot of music and manufacturing started shifting to China. My headphones wouldn't last a year or two. They would break in less than a month. The wire they use is braided like human hair so if you roll the wires up and unroll it it probably won't work because the wire breaks. Now I buy headphones from the dollar store because they last as long as the big prices in the department stores. It is the same or almost the same quality wire you find in the dollar store.
I might be thick, but I'm still missing the point. My point was the Arduino has been around longer, has a huge array of community contributed documentation and is cheaper (even when produced in countries that care about quality).
The killer is not the price. It's the documentation. "Microcontrollers for dummies" if you will. Additionally as Leon pointed out above, the Arduino is also popular with arty types. Arty types don't tend to use Windows.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
You only ever need two tools in life. If it moves and it shouldn't use Duct Tape. If it does not move and it should use WD40.
I might be thick, but I'm still missing the point. My point was the Arduino has been around longer, has a huge array of community contributed documentation and is cheaper (even when produced in countries that care about quality).
The killer is not the price. It's the documentation. "Microcontrollers for dummies" if you will. Additionally as Leon pointed out above, the Arduino is also popular with arty types. Arty types don't tend to use Windows.
Sparkfun's own website says you have to be gentle with the switch on the arduino·because it breaks.· They said it on their own website so it is not like I'm trying to be biased against their product but the information is there.
I do think price has a lot to do with it. The Arduino basic board is like $30.00 most places, whereas the propeller boards are considerably more. Plus, as mentioned, the propeller needs a plethora of external components(EEPROM, two voltage regs, resonators, caps....ect). And then if you try to compare the basic stamp to the Arduino, The price difference grows even larger. They want fifty bucks for the bs2, which compared to the Arduino, is woefully underpowered. Parallax needs to lower their prices(Especially in these hard times), if they want to keep up with the Arduino. In my opinion, the two best micros are the Propeller and the Picaxe.... NUFF SAID
Sparkfun's own website says you have to be gentle with the switch on the arduino because it breaks. They said it on their own website so it is not like I'm trying to be biased against their product but the information is there.
It's Italian, what do you expect? If you want a good example of some great Italian engineering, let me send you some Ducati rockers minus the hard-chrome.
Germans engineer. Italians make art [noparse];)[/noparse]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
You only ever need two tools in life. If it moves and it shouldn't use Duct Tape. If it does not move and it should use WD40.
It's Italian, what do you expect? If you want a good example of some great Italian engineering, let me send you some Ducati rockers minus the hard-chrome.
Germans engineer. Italians make art [noparse];)[/noparse]
I think Sparkfun added it as a disclaimer because they were tired of returns and couldn't stop the demand nor wanted to refuse the business.
As a consumer, I don't like to return things though sometimes it is necessary.· If you are a parent, replacing these items means you·may be out of pocket.
If I was writing for Consumer Reports, I would probably mention this.
If I really wanted an Arduino then I think one of my first projects would be to design a board that didn't break because having a functioning product is what it is about.· I pay people to do their job and if I think the product will break then I·probably won't·buy it.
I might be thick, but I'm still missing the point. My point was the Arduino has been around longer, has a huge array of community contributed documentation and is cheaper (even when produced in countries that care about quality).
The killer is not the price. It's the documentation. "Microcontrollers for dummies" if you will. Additionally as Leon pointed out above, the Arduino is also popular with arty types. Arty types don't tend to use Windows.
I should point out that this is one of the other reasons I was able to adopt the Arduino for use in my classroom. Without the wealth of accessible material out there I would not have been able to get started. Now, after I teach my high school students the basics, I turn them loose on the net to learn (with guidance). By then end of my class I have a variety of different projects. This semester I have students creating: a Drum Machine, automatic nerf gun turret, laser tag, Processing controlled robot, pong, automatic camera, and a Robotic Blimp.
I should also mention that these are students who have never done electronics or programming before. Without the massive amount of material available we'd not be able to do this.
So in the end it was really a combination of cost and material on the net that drove me to Arduino. It also doesn't hurt that Arduino was designed with artists, rather than engineers, in mind. This means that many projects are presented in a way that is much more accessible by n00bs.
I should point out that this is one of the other reasons I was able to adopt the Arduino for use in my classroom. Without the wealth of accessible material out there I would not have been able to get started. Now, after I teach my high school students the basics, I turn them loose on the net to learn (with guidance). By then end of my class I have a variety of different projects. This semester I have students creating: a Drum Machine, automatic nerf gun turret, laser tag, Processing controlled robot, pong, automatic camera, and a Robotic Blimp.
I should also mention that these are students who have never done electronics or programming before. Without the massive amount of material available we'd not be able to do this.
So in the end it was really a combination of cost and material on the net that drove me to Arduino. It also doesn't hurt that Arduino was designed with artists, rather than engineers, in mind. This means that many projects are presented in a way that is much more accessible by n00bs.
Steve,
Is your high school class on electronics an elective and is it half a year or a full year?· If it is an elective, what percentage of your class is male and what percentage is female?
If you were to take a guess, what percentage of them are into microcontrollers after your class is over?
How many of your students go onto another controller after your class?· If they were interested, how many of them could?
Are there any educational requirements for them to get into your class?
Is your high school class on electronics an elective and is it half a year or a full year? If it is an elective, what percentage of your class is male and what percentage is female?
If you were to take a guess, what percentage of them are into microcontrollers after your class is over?
How many of your students go onto another controller after your class? If they were interested, how many of them could?
Are there any educational requirements for them to get into your class?
Honest questions.
Chuck
One semester elective course. Although I do allow students to take another semester. In which case it's more of an independent study.
Mostly male. Probably 15-20% female overall.
I harbor few illusions. By the end of the semester some (20% or so) of my students could very easily continue very independently and learn on their own, in fact some of my students will have learned somethings I don't know. Maybe 1 in 40 actually do work with their Arduino's after the class, but more than that go to college for engineering. Probably an equal 20% or so barely understand the code behind their final projects. The remaining students are somewhere in between. I do have a couple Basic Stamps (incl. one BoeBot) and some PICAXEs. So far none of my continuing students have expressed interest in them. I currently don't have any programmers for PICs or Atmel chips.
There are no specific requirements to take the course.
I try approach the course as inquiry in almost its truest educationalese definition of the word. We learn just enough code and electronics to start working on projects and then pick up the other pieces along the way, at least that's the intent. So that by the end not all students will have the same skill sets.
I think you mentioned that cost was one deciding factor (among others) for choosing an Arduino over a BASIC Stamp.
Also, the follow-on interest rate of working with an Arduino after class was perhaps 1 in 40. I'm wondering if the students would have had a higher level of interest if they were using a Boe-Bot, and the concept of programming was combined with sensors, mechanics, and competition. Further, the tutorial would provide a self-guided program for the students yet provide more challenging diversions for those who need them.
Therefore, provided you are interested, I'd be pleased to send you a few Boe-Bot kits from Parallax to try in this capacity. No charge, no obligation. We don't call on customers to do sales so you'd not hear from us again unless you needed some support.
If you are interested please contact me offline at kgracey@parallax.com.
Ken, I actually think a bulk of the problem with it is the mode of thinking for the people using it must change. I've had other people use the boebots and the problem is they have trouble understanding the flow of the code and getting it to do more. Another problem I'm trying to solve is that after the initial interest phase people back away as it takes more effort than they're willing to put out to go farther. I haven't done much lately with a busy schedule but I know of people who say they have "boring summers" and would love to learn robotics, so maybe I'll find out then. Anyway, good luck Steve if you try teaching robotics.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Pi aren't squared, pi are round. Cornbread are squared!
I learned my basic programming on the Boe Bot, but then the Propeller has gotten me more and more advanced in it. I think that the Boe Bot and the BS2 are some of the most educational materials around, and it has gotten me far.
I tried to get other people interested in microcontrollers and though I was tactful, they looked at me as if it was a dirty word because my stepbrother worked with computers longer than I have and he says they are difficult for people and take up a lot of time.· His suggestion was for me to get something working and share it with them.· Giving someone something to play with is a more friendly approach which is what Ken offered and if anyone is going to learn something it takes someone to go out and do it.· They have to be willing to take it to the next level.
I share what I'm doing but·other people are not interested.· I tell them I read an article hanging up in an IVY League College / Engineering department·that said if you know JAVA and C then you have a job for life and that is why microcontrollers is one thing they should teach their children (among many many other things).
I was given a Commodore 64 and I learned Basic Programming.· I then learned it in High School and my college didn't care that I learned it at home and in High School so they made me take it again and they made me take Pascal.· There were programming projects that I had to write and flowchart and there were a lot of students begging for help in college because none of them knew how to program and trying to learn it in one semester is challenging for people who don't have any idea of what they are doing and challenging for people who don't know a thing about computers.· I knew some of the things to do but it was equally frustrating trying to express / explain·some things using the English language.· I also wrote some things and the professors were like: you didn't write that because they give these things that are extremely difficult for people.
There were people in college who were told to write a program to average grades.· If you don't know how to do it by hand then how do you go about it with making a computer do it?· You have a keyboard input, a screen, variables and equations and Pascal was annoying because I had to declare my variables before I knew I needed them.· It is cookbook if you know the components and how to put them together but there are people who don't know how to do things like that so telling them to program something they don't know how to do in the first place is impossible.
Parallax made a robot with a textbook.· Whether we like them or dislike them, they are giving people an opportunity to learn.· Engineering is a good paying field and one thing about the computer industry is that it doesn't matter what you try to do because it all costs money.· Every two or three years, a computer is absolete.· Those who keep up are sometimes upgrading their computer every year.
"I've had other people use the boebots and the problem is they have trouble understanding the flow of the code and getting it to do more."
The instructor/teacher/professor is the one who knows what level and what activities to introduce to their students.· Some things are for beginners and some things are for experts.· I'm sure it will teach the basics and sometimes the basics aren't easy.· Teaching is more than saying a bunch of facts; it is also how you present the information in a format that people can learn.· And sometimes in life we can't always have what we want.
The reason people couldn't learn the Commodore 64 is because they wouldn't pick up a book, they wouldn't pick up a computer magazine like RUN, Compute, Compute's Gazette, Ahoy, The Transactor, where people like you and me teach someone to do something, give code, give examples and explanations.· TV, going out with friends or sports was always more important.
I bought "Machine Language Programming For the Commodore 64" and after Jim Butterfield's death, it is a collector's item because he made assembly language understandable.· The job is to take hard things and reduce them to their simplest forms and go step by step.
In electronics, you have to learn what a circuit is and how electricity flows and you also have to be able to syncronize it with programming.· People aren't impressed for long with blinky lights (except for those who know you are getting an understanding) but it gives you an understanding and not all learning is up to the teacher.· It is the student's job to learn it.· The teacher can't make people learn.· They can make it easier and sometimes it helps to learn what you can see as the boebot has a lot of parts.· It is expandable so if you are a hacker then you can do more but the problem is if you are a beginner then you will find it challenging but if you are an expert then you can move on.· The boebot should provoke enough jealousy that those who are serious enough and able will learn it.· We have to be willing to take what we know to the next levela and if that means investing in one of these kits then that is how you may have to learn it.· I've also seen the boebot being carried around at the University of Pennsylvania so someone there uses it for a class; it is where the digital age began and it is an Ivy League college.· But if people can't learn it then how do you learn on a more sophisticated system?· You don't.· The basics are important because the main things are the plain things and if you can't get it to work with the main things then you don't go forward unless you happen to find a workaround.
There is a lot to what you say, and I completely understand all of it. I can understand the requirements to understand the basics, and the effort this requires. As it is I'm frustrated with myself because I still haven't put in the effort to learn C and ASM to the fullest. This is espesscially important in my mind because I plan to go to Idaho State College of Tech, where I'll be forced to endure all of the basics, including programming an old chip in hexadecimal to +- 1 clockcycle of 3 seconds. I know the challenge, the trouble is effectively creating interest in the subject so others will as well.
I have many ideas to try out this summer to create a create a robotics goup here where I live, and I'm even hoping to use a robot I'm working to complete right now to feed peoples curiosity for robotics. If it get's the way I plan I don't think there will be any better way of expressing the 'cool' factor of robotics than when I get my robot fully functional to attend paintball wars. As it is I've already invoked a large amound of curiosity and surprize in the people I talk to when I tell them the the little picture on my phone actually weighs 150 pounds, and I can only imagine what they would think to have paintballs shot at them by it. Sure I can't make anyone put out the effort to learn how to build the things I work on, but if I can make robotics sound like something worth learning it's all the better.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Pi aren't squared, pi are round. Cornbread are squared!
Yes, people have to be intrigued enough to carry on.
The current retro game movement helps with this too. Retro on micros is growing in popularity. That's another path that might appeal where robotics doesn't.
After reading this thread I became curious about Arduino. The Basic Stamp is the only microcontroller I've programmed and while I like it, I have no basis for comparison. So I picked up one of these http://www.moderndevice.com/products/rbbb-kit plus a programming plug for less than $20. I've plugged it into the breadboard of my CBA robot and the robot didn't explode. I'm now working on getting the two of them to talk to each other. The plan is to solve my out of pins problem on the Basic Stamp by dividing labor between the two processors.
I already know the C programming language, I found it trivial to cut and paste a PBASIC program into the IDE and translate it to C using library functions. Their IDE comes with plenty of samples which helps too. While PBASIC is a major leap forward over eight bit assembler, C handles signed arithmetic much better.
I had considered building a BS2 OEM and plugging that into the breadboard, but I'll learn more by trying out the Arduino. I had also considered picking up this 40 pin propeller kit: http://www.wulfden.org/TheShoppe/prop/rbpk.shtml which I may still do.
What I don't see mentioned here (and in some of the Prop threads on a similar topic) is the extreme value of Processing, the open source dev. environment that the Arduino IDE leverages (in the form of Wiring, the embedded subset of Processing). Processing lets the user develop PC applications for Mac, PC, Linux, etc., in an environment similar to the IDE for the embedded devices.
It then becomes to relatively trivial to connect the PC (laptop, desktop, mobile, whatever) to outboard electronics (whether via wireless or tethered serial or usb or bluetooth).
How many threads/projects are there where someone has spent time developing a VB or .NET or Python or similar PC-side script to then communicate with embedded devices?
And the cross-platform capability (whether for developing PC-side apps or firmware) can't be emphasized enough. Parallax products -- generally -- seem to have a total lack of formal support for anything but Windows (and I'm not sure I would count BST as it's not a Parallax app. per se).
I'm not an Arduino user, per se, but I use Processing and Wiring (sometimes) for exactly the reasons stated above.
What would be a big "foothold" would be to create Processing and Wiring compatible libraries for Parallax chips/products (e.g. Prop and the entire Stamp line, Pings, the motor controllers, etc.... and my beloved SX -- I wish!). Given the strides made in various models for Prop C code generation, it would seem very possible. This would let the millions of Processing/Wiring/Arduino users import Parallax libraries, use huge chunks of existing code (with some changes of course, esp. when it comes to ADC) and know that they could create both PC apps and firmware and download and go. It seems the Parallax approach is NOT to rely on any outside software/parties per se (i.e. the open source community that develops Processing and Wiring), but it would give casual and advanced users a "go to" environment that runs on all major platforms.
Just my two cents, sincerely not worth more than that
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔ When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. -- HST
So far I've found the Arduino IDE to be decent if a bit sluggish. I use Linux as well as Windows, so anything cross platform comes in handy. I'll have to learn more about Processing and Wiring as PC microcontroller integration sounds interesting.
I'm with Zoot, I think it would be great if Parallax would create Processing and Wiring libraries for the Prop so the Ardunino folks and others could access it as well.
As far as Retro computing goes, it's really cool, though I can't see it attracting teenagers, more likely middle-aged guys like me who grew up with the Timex Sinclair, Ataris and Commodore computers who like computers that were still accessible by mere mortals. I still remember C and Pascal compilers fitting onto single 3 1/2" diskettes.
Arduino has always seemed a bit of a hype to me as they started out talking in a jargon that marketed themselves as artist, rather than something else. They don't use boards, they use shields, etc. PIXaxe equally turned me off for similar reasons.
And yet, Arduino seems to have been very successful, hip, and cool. But it is also a bit of distraction if you turn to all that has gone before in digital technology.
On the other hand, AVR chips are really quite good with vast resources that can be very powerful in the right hands. My respect for them comes from having 8 ADC channels on board, a Real Time Clock, and nearly 64K of ram. What I am referring to is BasicStamp competition, the ZBasic product.
ZBasic's predecessor, BasicX was and still is hard to swallow - shallow support, odd code solutions, little on-going development. It failed to tap the resources in the AVR in the right way (I fear that maybe Arduino will run into similar hazards). But the ZXes are quite useful, powerful, and clear with the support of some people that are rigorous programmers -- it is all there, multitasking, RTC, ADC, OOP, and so on.)
Still the Propeller offers a completely different kind of architecture with video, keyboard, and mouse interface easily deployed and I am awed by it. And so I really feel under the right conditions, the two together make a rather complete set of resources. Though I must admit that mostly the Propeller is doing the user interface, while the AVR takes on the mundane chore work in a multi-tasking way.
I doubt if I will ever use Arduino, but AVRs do have a lot to offer when the right OS is there to compliment. But even the lowly Basic Stamp has great usefulness in many contexts. Some people will always stay with Arduino. Right now I am adapting a Propeller Proto Board to communicate with an on-board ZX-24a via RS-232 serial and a twin system. And I hope to include backup power to keep the Real Time Clock up and running 24/7.
In truth, one really learns much more by mastering and comparison of several systems. Much as I am loyal to Parallax for many reasons, there is nothing wrong with seeing what others do and trying to combine. These days, the hybrid solutions are creating great new technologies.
What Parallax has for 'in school programs' are the following;
1. A reliable PBASIC that following the tradition of all Basic languages to enable a beginner to see and use the fundamental features of computer programming. (And everyone was a beginner at one time.)
2. An excellent exploration tool in the form of the BOE-BOT. The chassis allows one to bolt on anything that might work and kindles the imagination of the user. Mine has had the BasicStamp, the SXes, and the Propeller pushing it around in different incarnations (even the ZX can do so).
3. A powerful, exotic alternative to 'normal' computer architectures in the form of the Propeller that offers the chance to focus on video and gaming horizons (AVR will never do this). This is the penultimate 'think piece' of micro-controllers, as iconic as the Rubix Cube. You may not want it, but you just can't ignore it!!!!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ain't gadetry a wonderful thing?
aka G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
Post Edited (Loopy Byteloose) : 7/28/2010 10:26:05 AM GMT
I thought I would mention my experience at a recent two day Arduino workshop (Howduino Newcastle) I attended.
Of the 33 people there, I would say a third were "technical" (~4 electronics/electrical, ~6 software/IT) and the rest as Leon has mentioned were "non-technical" art and media guys and girls, mainly students and a few educators and professional artists.
What was evident, after some introductions, a little small talk, everybody got down to building things. Some Shields were being used for Ethernet, Xbee modules etc. but mainly people were sticking wires into the Arduino headers and using breadboard to build with. For those noobies, the first day was spent going through examples either from the Arduino IDE or website or building the oomlout starter kit most of the noobies had (it came with nice paper component layout sheets which you placed over the breadboard and pushed your components through).
No one seem to have difficulties in programming in C, mainly I think because the IDE hides the complexity of compiler setup, libraries and such like and because in processing you only need two functions setup and loop to get started, which are automatically generated when you start a new "sketch" (project). Most people I suspect, were just picking an example closest to what they were doing and just modifying that to suit their needs.
At the end there were things flying, driving, spinning, switching and displaying, everyone had a sense of achievement. I took along some Prop and Xmos stuff to show what else is out there and only a few of the technical guys were interested.
There really doesn't need to be anything (at all) special created for Processing to work with the prop. I like Processing and use it often with props, avrs, and arduinos (which are just avrs, after all).
There is a library that allows Processing to talk to a specific application running on the arduino. This allows your PC to get direct access to the pins on the arduino (for input and output). But, I've never used it except to play with.
But, the basic connection is just serial communications between the two. There is nothing special about it. You can write your prop and Processing programs to send and receive data through that connection.
TonyD said...
I thought I would mention my experience at a recent two day Arduino workshop (Howduino Newcastle) I attended.
Of the 33 people there, I would say a third were "technical" (~4 electronics/electrical, ~6 software/IT) and the rest as Leon has mentioned were "non-technical" art and media guys and girls, mainly students and a few educators and professional artists...
It has been my experience that "engineering types" just can't think along the same lines as "artistic types" and the other way around. No point in even trying!
With these people, it could be something as silly as just the name of the product! Perhaps if you rename the Propeller "H
Comments
Good post. I commend you for your efforts.
Chuck
I understand people's desire to try many microcontrollers, in fact I'm the same way. Although I know the Parallax products best I'm forced to push myself out of my comfort zone and try other micros, such as the Pic and hopefully the Arduino later. It is truly only of benefit as more knowledge comes out of it. I was even surprised when going to tour the college I plan to attend in a year to hear that the professor considered the Propeller "too simple" to use in college, preferring to use only microcontrollers that made the programmer do everything with no shortcuts. I guess I can't blame him for that, considering how much I turn to the OBEX, but hearing that gave me all the more desire to learn more languages and figure out all there is to microcontrollers.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Pi aren't squared, pi are round. Cornbread are squared!
π,
It is good to learn to program and become fluent in more than one language.
For as far as the class goes, the only opinion that matters in your class is that of your professor.· It is easier to go with the flow instead of·nudge your professor·because they can regulate what goes on.
·
However I would be afraid to show this to someone just learning programming. I think it might scare them away?
I hate to nit-pick, but this irritates me. The "PIC" is a family of processors, the "Arduino" is not. Having said that, the Atmel stuff looks reasonably nice to program, and (like the PIC) there are a gazillion simple examples out there for it.
Now, having got that off, the Arduino community has quite a head start on the Prop (years). Even RS in Europe has picked up Arduino. RS price for an "Arduino compatible" Atmel chip with the bootloader pre-programmed? 5 quid. Price for a bare Propeller? 13.50 quid. Best part was when navigating to the Propeller by doing a search for "Parallax", it showed me the microcontroller hardware picture of an Arduino board.
The Propeller is not old enough to have gained significant traction over older, more established products. It's not as cheap and it's not as easy (needs 3.3v & external eeprom). It will get there though.
Maybe someone should take a week and just scour the web looking at some of the Arduino documentation and the plethora of books available on the platform to see what people are actually using it for and how one might shape technical documentation and examples to appeal to that crowd. Of course, maybe that's already happened or in progress...
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
You only ever need two tools in life. If it moves and it shouldn't use Duct Tape. If it does not move and it should use WD40.
I use to like listening to a lot of music and manufacturing started shifting to China.· My headphones wouldn't last a year or two.· They would break in less than a month.· The wire they use is braided like human hair so if you roll·the wires·up and unroll it it probably won't work because the wire breaks.· Now I buy headphones from the dollar store because they last as long as the big prices in the department stores.· It is the same or almost the same·quality wire you find in the dollar store.
The jumper wire I got appears to be the same guage.· I haven't spliced one of the wires to see what is inside.· But imagine putting it in your project and one day you don't have electrical continuity.· Then you will be debugging the circuit trying to figure out where the fault lies.
·
I might be thick, but I'm still missing the point. My point was the Arduino has been around longer, has a huge array of community contributed documentation and is cheaper (even when produced in countries that care about quality).
The killer is not the price. It's the documentation. "Microcontrollers for dummies" if you will. Additionally as Leon pointed out above, the Arduino is also popular with arty types. Arty types don't tend to use Windows.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
You only ever need two tools in life. If it moves and it shouldn't use Duct Tape. If it does not move and it should use WD40.
It's Italian, what do you expect? If you want a good example of some great Italian engineering, let me send you some Ducati rockers minus the hard-chrome.
Germans engineer. Italians make art [noparse];)[/noparse]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
You only ever need two tools in life. If it moves and it shouldn't use Duct Tape. If it does not move and it should use WD40.
As a consumer, I don't like to return things though sometimes it is necessary.· If you are a parent, replacing these items means you·may be out of pocket.
If I was writing for Consumer Reports, I would probably mention this.
If I really wanted an Arduino then I think one of my first projects would be to design a board that didn't break because having a functioning product is what it is about.· I pay people to do their job and if I think the product will break then I·probably won't·buy it.
I should point out that this is one of the other reasons I was able to adopt the Arduino for use in my classroom. Without the wealth of accessible material out there I would not have been able to get started. Now, after I teach my high school students the basics, I turn them loose on the net to learn (with guidance). By then end of my class I have a variety of different projects. This semester I have students creating: a Drum Machine, automatic nerf gun turret, laser tag, Processing controlled robot, pong, automatic camera, and a Robotic Blimp.
I should also mention that these are students who have never done electronics or programming before. Without the massive amount of material available we'd not be able to do this.
So in the end it was really a combination of cost and material on the net that drove me to Arduino. It also doesn't hurt that Arduino was designed with artists, rather than engineers, in mind. This means that many projects are presented in a way that is much more accessible by n00bs.
Steve,
Is your high school class on electronics an elective and is it half a year or a full year?· If it is an elective, what percentage of your class is male and what percentage is female?
If you were to take a guess, what percentage of them are into microcontrollers after your class is over?
How many of your students go onto another controller after your class?· If they were interested, how many of them could?
Are there any educational requirements for them to get into your class?
Honest questions.
Chuck
Post Edited (Chuckz) : 4/29/2010 11:39:04 AM GMT
One semester elective course. Although I do allow students to take another semester. In which case it's more of an independent study.
Mostly male. Probably 15-20% female overall.
I harbor few illusions. By the end of the semester some (20% or so) of my students could very easily continue very independently and learn on their own, in fact some of my students will have learned somethings I don't know. Maybe 1 in 40 actually do work with their Arduino's after the class, but more than that go to college for engineering. Probably an equal 20% or so barely understand the code behind their final projects. The remaining students are somewhere in between. I do have a couple Basic Stamps (incl. one BoeBot) and some PICAXEs. So far none of my continuing students have expressed interest in them. I currently don't have any programmers for PICs or Atmel chips.
There are no specific requirements to take the course.
I try approach the course as inquiry in almost its truest educationalese definition of the word. We learn just enough code and electronics to start working on projects and then pick up the other pieces along the way, at least that's the intent. So that by the end not all students will have the same skill sets.
I think you mentioned that cost was one deciding factor (among others) for choosing an Arduino over a BASIC Stamp.
Also, the follow-on interest rate of working with an Arduino after class was perhaps 1 in 40. I'm wondering if the students would have had a higher level of interest if they were using a Boe-Bot, and the concept of programming was combined with sensors, mechanics, and competition. Further, the tutorial would provide a self-guided program for the students yet provide more challenging diversions for those who need them.
Therefore, provided you are interested, I'd be pleased to send you a few Boe-Bot kits from Parallax to try in this capacity. No charge, no obligation. We don't call on customers to do sales so you'd not hear from us again unless you needed some support.
If you are interested please contact me offline at kgracey@parallax.com.
Sincerely,
Ken Gracey
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ken Gracey
Parallax Inc.
Follow me at http://twitter.com/ParallaxKen for some insider news.
Post Edited (Ken Gracey (Parallax)) : 4/29/2010 3:12:50 PM GMT
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Pi aren't squared, pi are round. Cornbread are squared!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Check out my new website!!
Use the Propeller icon!!
Follow me on Twitter! Search "Microcontrolled"
π,
I tried to get other people interested in microcontrollers and though I was tactful, they looked at me as if it was a dirty word because my stepbrother worked with computers longer than I have and he says they are difficult for people and take up a lot of time.· His suggestion was for me to get something working and share it with them.· Giving someone something to play with is a more friendly approach which is what Ken offered and if anyone is going to learn something it takes someone to go out and do it.· They have to be willing to take it to the next level.
I share what I'm doing but·other people are not interested.· I tell them I read an article hanging up in an IVY League College / Engineering department·that said if you know JAVA and C then you have a job for life and that is why microcontrollers is one thing they should teach their children (among many many other things).
I was given a Commodore 64 and I learned Basic Programming.· I then learned it in High School and my college didn't care that I learned it at home and in High School so they made me take it again and they made me take Pascal.· There were programming projects that I had to write and flowchart and there were a lot of students begging for help in college because none of them knew how to program and trying to learn it in one semester is challenging for people who don't have any idea of what they are doing and challenging for people who don't know a thing about computers.· I knew some of the things to do but it was equally frustrating trying to express / explain·some things using the English language.· I also wrote some things and the professors were like: you didn't write that because they give these things that are extremely difficult for people.
There were people in college who were told to write a program to average grades.· If you don't know how to do it by hand then how do you go about it with making a computer do it?· You have a keyboard input, a screen, variables and equations and Pascal was annoying because I had to declare my variables before I knew I needed them.· It is cookbook if you know the components and how to put them together but there are people who don't know how to do things like that so telling them to program something they don't know how to do in the first place is impossible.
Parallax made a robot with a textbook.· Whether we like them or dislike them, they are giving people an opportunity to learn.· Engineering is a good paying field and one thing about the computer industry is that it doesn't matter what you try to do because it all costs money.· Every two or three years, a computer is absolete.· Those who keep up are sometimes upgrading their computer every year.
"I've had other people use the boebots and the problem is they have trouble understanding the flow of the code and getting it to do more."
The instructor/teacher/professor is the one who knows what level and what activities to introduce to their students.· Some things are for beginners and some things are for experts.· I'm sure it will teach the basics and sometimes the basics aren't easy.· Teaching is more than saying a bunch of facts; it is also how you present the information in a format that people can learn.· And sometimes in life we can't always have what we want.
The reason people couldn't learn the Commodore 64 is because they wouldn't pick up a book, they wouldn't pick up a computer magazine like RUN, Compute, Compute's Gazette, Ahoy, The Transactor, where people like you and me teach someone to do something, give code, give examples and explanations.· TV, going out with friends or sports was always more important.
I bought "Machine Language Programming For the Commodore 64" and after Jim Butterfield's death, it is a collector's item because he made assembly language understandable.· The job is to take hard things and reduce them to their simplest forms and go step by step.
In electronics, you have to learn what a circuit is and how electricity flows and you also have to be able to syncronize it with programming.· People aren't impressed for long with blinky lights (except for those who know you are getting an understanding) but it gives you an understanding and not all learning is up to the teacher.· It is the student's job to learn it.· The teacher can't make people learn.· They can make it easier and sometimes it helps to learn what you can see as the boebot has a lot of parts.· It is expandable so if you are a hacker then you can do more but the problem is if you are a beginner then you will find it challenging but if you are an expert then you can move on.· The boebot should provoke enough jealousy that those who are serious enough and able will learn it.· We have to be willing to take what we know to the next levela and if that means investing in one of these kits then that is how you may have to learn it.· I've also seen the boebot being carried around at the University of Pennsylvania so someone there uses it for a class; it is where the digital age began and it is an Ivy League college.· But if people can't learn it then how do you learn on a more sophisticated system?· You don't.· The basics are important because the main things are the plain things and if you can't get it to work with the main things then you don't go forward unless you happen to find a workaround.
·
I have many ideas to try out this summer to create a create a robotics goup here where I live, and I'm even hoping to use a robot I'm working to complete right now to feed peoples curiosity for robotics. If it get's the way I plan I don't think there will be any better way of expressing the 'cool' factor of robotics than when I get my robot fully functional to attend paintball wars. As it is I've already invoked a large amound of curiosity and surprize in the people I talk to when I tell them the the little picture on my phone actually weighs 150 pounds, and I can only imagine what they would think to have paintballs shot at them by it. Sure I can't make anyone put out the effort to learn how to build the things I work on, but if I can make robotics sound like something worth learning it's all the better.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Pi aren't squared, pi are round. Cornbread are squared!
Yes, people have to be intrigued enough to carry on.
The current retro game movement helps with this too. Retro on micros is growing in popularity. That's another path that might appeal where robotics doesn't.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller Wiki: Share the coolness!
8x8 color 80 Column NTSC Text Object
Safety Tip: Life is as good as YOU think it is!
I already know the C programming language, I found it trivial to cut and paste a PBASIC program into the IDE and translate it to C using library functions. Their IDE comes with plenty of samples which helps too. While PBASIC is a major leap forward over eight bit assembler, C handles signed arithmetic much better.
I had considered building a BS2 OEM and plugging that into the breadboard, but I'll learn more by trying out the Arduino. I had also considered picking up this 40 pin propeller kit: http://www.wulfden.org/TheShoppe/prop/rbpk.shtml which I may still do.
It then becomes to relatively trivial to connect the PC (laptop, desktop, mobile, whatever) to outboard electronics (whether via wireless or tethered serial or usb or bluetooth).
How many threads/projects are there where someone has spent time developing a VB or .NET or Python or similar PC-side script to then communicate with embedded devices?
And the cross-platform capability (whether for developing PC-side apps or firmware) can't be emphasized enough. Parallax products -- generally -- seem to have a total lack of formal support for anything but Windows (and I'm not sure I would count BST as it's not a Parallax app. per se).
I'm not an Arduino user, per se, but I use Processing and Wiring (sometimes) for exactly the reasons stated above.
What would be a big "foothold" would be to create Processing and Wiring compatible libraries for Parallax chips/products (e.g. Prop and the entire Stamp line, Pings, the motor controllers, etc.... and my beloved SX -- I wish!). Given the strides made in various models for Prop C code generation, it would seem very possible. This would let the millions of Processing/Wiring/Arduino users import Parallax libraries, use huge chunks of existing code (with some changes of course, esp. when it comes to ADC) and know that they could create both PC apps and firmware and download and go. It seems the Parallax approach is NOT to rely on any outside software/parties per se (i.e. the open source community that develops Processing and Wiring), but it would give casual and advanced users a "go to" environment that runs on all major platforms.
Just my two cents, sincerely not worth more than that
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. -- HST
create bitmap data tool: 1uffakind.com/robots/povBitMapBuilder.php
resistor ladder tool: 1uffakind.com/robots/resistorLadder.php
convert images to ascii art: 1uffakind.com/apptoys/convtoascii/
Post Edited (Zoot) : 7/28/2010 12:52:12 AM GMT
This shield is crazy http://www.hobby-roboter.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=72 as it is an AVR controlling a propeller chip! That's an insult if you ask me. It's like a Chihuahua bossing a Doberman around.
As far as Retro computing goes, it's really cool, though I can't see it attracting teenagers, more likely middle-aged guys like me who grew up with the Timex Sinclair, Ataris and Commodore computers who like computers that were still accessible by mere mortals. I still remember C and Pascal compilers fitting onto single 3 1/2" diskettes.
And yet, Arduino seems to have been very successful, hip, and cool. But it is also a bit of distraction if you turn to all that has gone before in digital technology.
On the other hand, AVR chips are really quite good with vast resources that can be very powerful in the right hands. My respect for them comes from having 8 ADC channels on board, a Real Time Clock, and nearly 64K of ram. What I am referring to is BasicStamp competition, the ZBasic product.
ZBasic's predecessor, BasicX was and still is hard to swallow - shallow support, odd code solutions, little on-going development. It failed to tap the resources in the AVR in the right way (I fear that maybe Arduino will run into similar hazards). But the ZXes are quite useful, powerful, and clear with the support of some people that are rigorous programmers -- it is all there, multitasking, RTC, ADC, OOP, and so on.)
Still the Propeller offers a completely different kind of architecture with video, keyboard, and mouse interface easily deployed and I am awed by it. And so I really feel under the right conditions, the two together make a rather complete set of resources. Though I must admit that mostly the Propeller is doing the user interface, while the AVR takes on the mundane chore work in a multi-tasking way.
I doubt if I will ever use Arduino, but AVRs do have a lot to offer when the right OS is there to compliment. But even the lowly Basic Stamp has great usefulness in many contexts. Some people will always stay with Arduino. Right now I am adapting a Propeller Proto Board to communicate with an on-board ZX-24a via RS-232 serial and a twin system. And I hope to include backup power to keep the Real Time Clock up and running 24/7.
In truth, one really learns much more by mastering and comparison of several systems. Much as I am loyal to Parallax for many reasons, there is nothing wrong with seeing what others do and trying to combine. These days, the hybrid solutions are creating great new technologies.
What Parallax has for 'in school programs' are the following;
1. A reliable PBASIC that following the tradition of all Basic languages to enable a beginner to see and use the fundamental features of computer programming. (And everyone was a beginner at one time.)
2. An excellent exploration tool in the form of the BOE-BOT. The chassis allows one to bolt on anything that might work and kindles the imagination of the user. Mine has had the BasicStamp, the SXes, and the Propeller pushing it around in different incarnations (even the ZX can do so).
3. A powerful, exotic alternative to 'normal' computer architectures in the form of the Propeller that offers the chance to focus on video and gaming horizons (AVR will never do this). This is the penultimate 'think piece' of micro-controllers, as iconic as the Rubix Cube. You may not want it, but you just can't ignore it!!!!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ain't gadetry a wonderful thing?
aka G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
Post Edited (Loopy Byteloose) : 7/28/2010 10:26:05 AM GMT
Of the 33 people there, I would say a third were "technical" (~4 electronics/electrical, ~6 software/IT) and the rest as Leon has mentioned were "non-technical" art and media guys and girls, mainly students and a few educators and professional artists.
What was evident, after some introductions, a little small talk, everybody got down to building things. Some Shields were being used for Ethernet, Xbee modules etc. but mainly people were sticking wires into the Arduino headers and using breadboard to build with. For those noobies, the first day was spent going through examples either from the Arduino IDE or website or building the oomlout starter kit most of the noobies had (it came with nice paper component layout sheets which you placed over the breadboard and pushed your components through).
No one seem to have difficulties in programming in C, mainly I think because the IDE hides the complexity of compiler setup, libraries and such like and because in processing you only need two functions setup and loop to get started, which are automatically generated when you start a new "sketch" (project). Most people I suspect, were just picking an example closest to what they were doing and just modifying that to suit their needs.
At the end there were things flying, driving, spinning, switching and displaying, everyone had a sense of achievement. I took along some Prop and Xmos stuff to show what else is out there and only a few of the technical guys were interested.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
- Tony
http://zuzebox.wordpress.com/
Post Edited (TonyD) : 7/28/2010 12:23:15 PM GMT
There is a library that allows Processing to talk to a specific application running on the arduino. This allows your PC to get direct access to the pins on the arduino (for input and output). But, I've never used it except to play with.
But, the basic connection is just serial communications between the two. There is nothing special about it. You can write your prop and Processing programs to send and receive data through that connection.
With these people, it could be something as silly as just the name of the product! Perhaps if you rename the Propeller "H