Propeller advocacy, getting to a wider community, the challange.
zoopydogsit
Posts: 174
This started as a reply to the "Getting to the average Joe", "Getting to Engineers" threads but realised this should probably be a separate thread as it needs to stay to an advocacy discussion. My view is that if we want to enjoy more and continued Parallax innovation then we need to help them get there.
I found out about the prop back in 2006'sh from ads Circuit Cellar. At the time I was looking at building a firefighting robot (google them - seriously fun!) and was planning on using the BS2E. But was concerned about the speed for everything I wanted to do, the Propeller was an amazing fit. The Prop1-B (extra-pins) would have been everything I needed! (I live in hope that one day they will bring out Prop1-B!). If there was only a Prop-II would be too hard and overkill (1.8V, etc) I would have gone elsewhere (reality of someone brought up on Crystal sets and TTL). Had I not used Parallax stuff before and had it been now and found the Arduino's first I may be in their forums using there stuff rather than my love of Props.
I'm less interested in outreach or connecting with the average "Joe". We should focus on connecting with the "Brians" (the geeky kid that plays with technology)·and the "Phils" (new term sorry. A "Phil" is one of us, someone inventive, into electronics, wants to get their hands dirty.). But how do we connect/outreach the "Brians" and "Phils"?
Though we may have lost the "Brians". Sorry. If I was a kid these days, bombarded with technology, I'd probably be trying to break jail on an iPhone and learn how to write my own code. It's immediate!. It's something that I'd have, it's portable, in my pocket, I can show it off and share it. It would satiate their need to create with technology. A soldering iron and components are unlikely to reach them now.
For the Phils - folks like us. Their start in electronics was a crystal set they made with their uncle, they want to get their hands dirty (they probably went from Crystal sets, to transistor projects then CMOS & TTL to a ZX81, Commodore 64/Apple][noparse][[/noparse]·or something). And they are the uncles or neighbour of little "Brian" and will probably have failed to get his attention with the Crystal set, but have noticed that he'd want to build a robot (most likely a biped or quadrotor rather than a scribbler). But where would he get the information to start? As mentioned above it can be hard to get people to the Propeller through the Arduino noise.
I've noticed that in electronic magazines that Prop related articles are rare, so if they go to a Paper shop, book store or NewsAgent and pick up an electronics magazine then they are probably going to start playing with Arduino's. Likewise if they start to look around the web for completed projects and examples (this may be contentious) but they are more likely to fall accross something other than the Propeller. And if you go into an electronic store (certainly here in Australia) it's unlikely you will find a Propeller, much less a Propeller based project or kit.
So if we want more "Brians" and "Phils" to get into the Propeller and help·drive more Parallax innovation then we need to help Parallax on getting out there. Some suggestions are;
The challange is making them cool to interest a wider audience. Simple robots like Penguins would be good. Interface them with current technology (Parallax will need to invest or get someone to invest in coughing up an interface module, object, and code on the platform for iPhones, iTouch, iPads, Android's, whatever). I've noticed the "home control" market now use the iTouch, iPads and iPhones as interfaces over PCs and imbedded touch screens.
And I'm sorry to say this, but the starter platforms will need to be in Basic, as the "Phils" will be better at handling that than trying to learn SPIN. (Don't get me wrong, I like SPIN, but for a starter it could be a turn-off). Most folks would have touched a flavour of Basic at some time. We don't want them to walk away saying it's too hard, takes too much time.
So as a group the challange is building these base "cool" projects, peer reviewing them, polishing them, kitting, and publishing beyond these forum posts.
To get this level of advocacy this community need to work better with Parallax to build stuff that can be turned into kits, published, available and advertised. It probably starts with Parallax providing incentives by setting up the challenge to the community, probably though·more competitions or having dedicated staff driving projects through the cycle.
A good example would be the Prop-based digital radio. That would be a good 2010 Xmas present Crystal radio equivellent from Uncle "Phil" to little "Brian" to build together. Or a robotic equivelent that apped to "Brians" iPad/iPhone/iTouch. That would start to build a new market.
Thoughts? How do we connect with the "Phils" and "Brians"? Open to the challenge on getting kits out there? Ready to write an iProduct interface for the Prop?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
It's all a function of time.
Post Edited (zoopydogsit) : 7/16/2010 11:13:45 PM GMT
I found out about the prop back in 2006'sh from ads Circuit Cellar. At the time I was looking at building a firefighting robot (google them - seriously fun!) and was planning on using the BS2E. But was concerned about the speed for everything I wanted to do, the Propeller was an amazing fit. The Prop1-B (extra-pins) would have been everything I needed! (I live in hope that one day they will bring out Prop1-B!). If there was only a Prop-II would be too hard and overkill (1.8V, etc) I would have gone elsewhere (reality of someone brought up on Crystal sets and TTL). Had I not used Parallax stuff before and had it been now and found the Arduino's first I may be in their forums using there stuff rather than my love of Props.
I'm less interested in outreach or connecting with the average "Joe". We should focus on connecting with the "Brians" (the geeky kid that plays with technology)·and the "Phils" (new term sorry. A "Phil" is one of us, someone inventive, into electronics, wants to get their hands dirty.). But how do we connect/outreach the "Brians" and "Phils"?
Though we may have lost the "Brians". Sorry. If I was a kid these days, bombarded with technology, I'd probably be trying to break jail on an iPhone and learn how to write my own code. It's immediate!. It's something that I'd have, it's portable, in my pocket, I can show it off and share it. It would satiate their need to create with technology. A soldering iron and components are unlikely to reach them now.
For the Phils - folks like us. Their start in electronics was a crystal set they made with their uncle, they want to get their hands dirty (they probably went from Crystal sets, to transistor projects then CMOS & TTL to a ZX81, Commodore 64/Apple][noparse][[/noparse]·or something). And they are the uncles or neighbour of little "Brian" and will probably have failed to get his attention with the Crystal set, but have noticed that he'd want to build a robot (most likely a biped or quadrotor rather than a scribbler). But where would he get the information to start? As mentioned above it can be hard to get people to the Propeller through the Arduino noise.
I've noticed that in electronic magazines that Prop related articles are rare, so if they go to a Paper shop, book store or NewsAgent and pick up an electronics magazine then they are probably going to start playing with Arduino's. Likewise if they start to look around the web for completed projects and examples (this may be contentious) but they are more likely to fall accross something other than the Propeller. And if you go into an electronic store (certainly here in Australia) it's unlikely you will find a Propeller, much less a Propeller based project or kit.
So if we want more "Brians" and "Phils" to get into the Propeller and help·drive more Parallax innovation then we need to help Parallax on getting out there. Some suggestions are;
- Getting more completed projects documented and published in the completed projects forum. I've noticed that HackADay published at least one in the past (binary clock).·
- Get completed projects fully documented and seek to have them turned into kits (Gadget Gangster?).
- Get the completed projects on the web (HackADay, others?)
- Get interesting completed projects turned into kits (to get the "Phils" to build them with the "Brians").
- Get the projects published in paper and online magazines so the "Phils" can find out about them to build them with the "Brians".
- Work out other "cheap" ways of getting them published where the "Phils" will find them.
- Getting wider availability of these kits and components. Here in Australia I can easily buy an Arduino based kit but it would be extermely hard to buy a Propeller based kit.
The challange is making them cool to interest a wider audience. Simple robots like Penguins would be good. Interface them with current technology (Parallax will need to invest or get someone to invest in coughing up an interface module, object, and code on the platform for iPhones, iTouch, iPads, Android's, whatever). I've noticed the "home control" market now use the iTouch, iPads and iPhones as interfaces over PCs and imbedded touch screens.
And I'm sorry to say this, but the starter platforms will need to be in Basic, as the "Phils" will be better at handling that than trying to learn SPIN. (Don't get me wrong, I like SPIN, but for a starter it could be a turn-off). Most folks would have touched a flavour of Basic at some time. We don't want them to walk away saying it's too hard, takes too much time.
So as a group the challange is building these base "cool" projects, peer reviewing them, polishing them, kitting, and publishing beyond these forum posts.
To get this level of advocacy this community need to work better with Parallax to build stuff that can be turned into kits, published, available and advertised. It probably starts with Parallax providing incentives by setting up the challenge to the community, probably though·more competitions or having dedicated staff driving projects through the cycle.
A good example would be the Prop-based digital radio. That would be a good 2010 Xmas present Crystal radio equivellent from Uncle "Phil" to little "Brian" to build together. Or a robotic equivelent that apped to "Brians" iPad/iPhone/iTouch. That would start to build a new market.
Thoughts? How do we connect with the "Phils" and "Brians"? Open to the challenge on getting kits out there? Ready to write an iProduct interface for the Prop?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
It's all a function of time.
Post Edited (zoopydogsit) : 7/16/2010 11:13:45 PM GMT
Comments
http://forums.parallax.com/forums/default.aspx?f=25&m=468928
so people don't get confused.
Jim
I've cross posted. However I'm not talking about getting to the average "Joe" who could care less about a soldering iron and components. I'm more interested in attracting those looking for something that would otherwise be distracted by the Arduino or other platform. Hence the desire for a separate post and challenge folks to build, document and publish Completed Projects and consider turning them into kits.
There seems to be lots of activity in the Propeller forum, but few completed projects posted to the Completed Project forum as advocacy and examples of what others have achieved. I'm probably equally to blame. But it's an interesting observation.
Meanwhile, cross posted.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
It's all a function of time.
Post Edited (zoopydogsit) : 7/16/2010 11:54:29 PM GMT
Parallax just brought in a bunch of new equipment, so I doubt they are suffering. And in my humble opinion, they have a wonderful niche in the market and a reputation to carry them a long way. Why the big worry all of a-sudden?
Or are we just a bunch of nerds wanting to play Marketing Department this week?
Now, that was funny!
1)·The advocacy approach is superior to the unfavorable comparison approach.· In fact I'm not sure how the latter is expected to work.
2) The·radio angle.· I distinctly remember the magic of building a crystal radio·in First Grade.· Digital radio seems like a great 21st Century approach to creating the same magic.· Like crystal radio, the design may look simple, but it triggers questions and invites further inquiry
Edited to remove petulance.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who."
Post Edited (K2) : 7/28/2010 1:16:51 AM GMT
The Arduino came out with a common programing language " C " Its this that makes the Arduino so successful. I think if Parallax had introduced the Propeller in the lingo they were famous for " BASIC " They could have taking the market share in the Micro controller world.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
The Truth is out there············___$WMc%___···························· BoogerWoods, FL. USA
want speed?·want·to use the Propeller?·want to stay with BASIC___www.propbasic.com___
You can feel stupid by asking a stupid question or You can be really·stupid by not asking at all.
·
K2 I'm trying to source an Silabs Si570 I2C oscillator to drive two/three props at any frequency, but its hard to get. Some radio amateurs do group buys. Are you interested? Just google "Si570 price" to see what some are doing with it
Zoopy, where in Oz are you? I'm in Melbourne. There are others here randomly scattered across the country, with possible exception of Tas and NT.
I've got one mounted on a little home-made PCB here with a PIC, but apart from checking that it comes up on the default frequency, I haven't actually tried programming it. I could extract the Si570 part of the board and make it into a little breakout board, if anyone wants to use it with the Propeller. I might even be persuaded to make some boards.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Leon Heller
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Post Edited (Leon) : 7/17/2010 7:28:11 AM GMT
I think it's the news that Parallax is starting up a semiconductor divsion - presumably to compete with the "big boys" - that's got everyone interested.
That's not to say that we're not just "nerds playing marketing" as well!
Ross.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Catalina - a FREE C compiler for the Propeller - see Catalina
using that code for a USB host that was posted recently.
This could perhaps create a small radio that connected
by wifi to your home router and you could listen to any
internet radio station. It would be a fun project.
Might even be possible to make the radio work as a server
to send audio to other listeners....maybe a p2p audio net
so as not to tax your upstream too badly.
The Xmas Radio kit sounds fantastic. It would be a brilliant intro to the prop. There is a stereo project·that could be added (and there is a commercial one too with an amplifier).·If I understand correctly, the prop can also transmit RF, so what about a transmitter to the·AM/FM· and·to·play music from the SD to the car radio? Maybe there are other·extras that could also be included. I also think for this hobby market that Basic in some form would be an easier introduction than either Spin or C. Bean has been working here. Maybe we can flesh out a design spec and some of us can get some community hardware design together for Parallax to market for Xmas. What do you think? Does it need yet another thread? Does it need some Parallax support and if so, in what form -management/guidance/etc ?
I agree with Holly that a USB connection for such cheap dongles as WiFi (and Bluetooth) would be excellent. A lot of products are going WiFi. Don't be concerned that it takes 3 cogs (or more). Once it is stable I am sure there are plenty of us able to ultimately compress it down. BTW Bluetooth works and cost ~$5 IIRC. And they may even be lying around, or can be borrowed to test.
Helping Parallax is of prime importance for all of us, both for hobby and professional use. We will all benefit from lower prices, more utilities and hardware.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Links to other interesting threads:
· Home of the MultiBladeProps: TriBlade,·RamBlade,·SixBlade, website
· Single Board Computer:·3 Propeller ICs·and a·TriBladeProp board (ZiCog Z80 Emulator)
· Prop Tools under Development or Completed (Index)
· Emulators: CPUs Z80 etc; Micros Altair etc;· Terminals·VT100 etc; (Index) ZiCog (Z80) , MoCog (6809)·
· Prop OS: SphinxOS·, PropDos , PropCmd··· Search the Propeller forums·(uses advanced Google search)
My cruising website is: ·www.bluemagic.biz·· MultiBlade Props: www.cluso.bluemagic.biz
Sparkfun have such things for ten times the price !
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.
Third party support is good, but tools and code provided by hobbyist usually doesn't factor into the part selection process.· Product support needs to be provided by the vendor, or at the very least the vendor must be collaborating with the company that provides the development tools.
Just to make it perfectly clear, I do like the Prop for my hobby projects.· I have contributed code to the OBEX and I have worked on development tools for it.· The multiple processors in the Prop provide a lot of flexibility, and it makes it easy to configure a system in software instead of being stuck with a fixed hardware configuration.
Dave
That can't be right.
Linux originates from a "hobby" project.
GCC pretty much does to, given that Richard Stallman quit his job in order to get on with creating it just to give to the world for free.
An awful long time ago a company I was creating embedded software for designed their whole new product range around the fact the GCC and Linux and was available. They needed the networking capability of Linux which their VxWorks boxes could not deliver on at the time. That meant having to select a processor for which there was good support from GCC and would run Linux.
There was a lot of resistance to among many of the engineers to switch to Linux at the time, "too hobbyist" they said "no support" they said, we pushed ahead anyway. The company however is now happy that we did as that product has been a big hit for them and is now in it's umpteenth new improved version.
Is it my imagination or isn't nearly every gadget I pickup nowadays running this "hobbyists" Linux?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.
Having a discussion about it generates ideas and motivates people. That is EXACTLY how Linux grew to what it is today, BTW.
I've been in front of my local legislature regarding Linux several times. Good experience, great networking, and we got some stuff done too. [noparse]:)[/noparse]
The other thing, mentioned on the other two threads, is how executive buy in helps influence the parameters engineering uses for projects. When a technology is accepted at that level --even encouraged, engineering is then free to really work to apply it. That doesn't mean it's the best, or that it works, only that the risk for doing so isn't going to have a material impact on peoples job performance. That's huge for new technology looking to be adopted. Evangelizing is a necessary component of that too.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller Wiki: Share the coolness!
8x8 color 80 Column NTSC Text Object
Wondering how to set tile colors in the graphics_demo.spin?
Safety Tip: Life is as good as YOU think it is!
Same thing with the PIC32 and ARM, do a little add on board that gives the PIC/ARM user video and a keyboard, etc.
This way you don't have to bad mouth Ardunino(like 'a dead Prop is more useful than Ardunino' idiocy) or compete head on with them or any of the other competing chips but still get exposure and sales.
In this way the Prop can be viewed as a neat co-processor. Not the boss chip but a component that adds value to the system.
It's already been done. Andre LaMothe's Chameleon boards combine either an AVR or PIC32 with a Prop as the peripheral processor. The AVR version can be programmed with the Arduino software although it's physical layout is not compatible with Arduino Shields. An adapter could be easily made.
You'd have to check with Andre, but I suspect that sales have been "ho hum".
There's another recent thread started by Bill Henning on a design for a hardware compatible Propduino board. When he priced it out, it (like Andre's boards) are too expensive to compete directly with the Arduino. Look at the thread for details.
Dave
If you want to promote the Propeller, start a club and teach microcontrollers.· It is my assumption people will stick to the processor they've been introduced to because most of them don't know other processors and or won't be willing to do a lot of other investments when they've already invested in one platform.
How many of you have a blog to teach and make people lust after your inventions?· If you have something worth playing with, most likely other people will see it and want it.
I think a blog introducing people to microcontrollers and·making the prop simple and easy to understand is key to getting people involved.· There are a lot of people who don't understand the prop when someone could easily summarize 30 pages of instructions into two or three pages of instructions.· If you can only teach prop users then you can't teach someone who doesn't know what they are doing.· Your target audience should be someone who doesn't know anything.
Start a blog and do some of these projects for people who don't know what they are doing:
Teach them to use the interface for programming the prop in one page or less.
Prop with blinky lights.
Prop with 1 Octave Organ
Prop with POV display.
Prop with LCD.
Prop with temperature sensor displayed on LCD and RGB LED.
Prop reading signals from joystick and displaying the results of joystick movement on LCD.
Teletype with Xbee using the Prop using LCDs.
There is a wooden game solitaire game that I've played in restaurants.· I'm sure you could figure a way to play it on LEDs.· If you put "wooden game solitaire" in google, you will find results.
I think some of you could probably contract some of the users to create projects.
Perhaps Parallax could start a blogsite for user's blogs on their projects and start an alternate site like Prop a Day.· If you want to tell people about the prop then you need to start a show and tell which is basically what some of these blog sites do.
Already in place... www.propellerpowered.com Even has an RSS feed.
Getting traffic has been a little tricky... Promoting a blog is a little different that other types of websites.
It tends to be more habit based.
OBC
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller Feature Projects: PropellerPowered.com
Visit the: PROPELLERPOWERED SIG forum kindly hosted by Savage Circuits.
Nice blog!
I just started one. I'm going to put up some PASM tutorial
stuff. I have only been posting for 3 days but I have a small
bit of AVR stuff up and I plan on a Propeller post tomorrow.
(if I'm not too groggy from tonight...it's already in the morning here)
justasm.blogspot.com/
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller Wiki: Share the coolness!
8x8 color 80 Column NTSC Text Object
Wondering how to set tile colors in the graphics_demo.spin?
Safety Tip: Life is as good as YOU think it is!
I have some constructive criticism and that is all this is.· It needs more instructables.· It needs more lists of parts.· Can I buy the propeller powered paintgun?· Can I build it?· I didn't watch it enough to know but I'm guessing that I can't buy it.· Not releasing any more details about the credit card size computer?· I don't even know if it is powerful enough for me to be interested in it and I'm not easy to please.
Relationships are reciprocol or complimentary and when people want to see others part of the community then the answer has to be "yes" to the above questions or it is viewed as the end of conversation.· Good for those who like watching the products but what does it do for me?
I still haven't programmed the propeller so viewing these projects doesn't get me to my goal.· I suppose I'll be reading "What is a microcontroller?" and "Programming the Propeller with Spin" because that is the only contact that newbies will be introduced to getting involved because they don't know how to jump in and program the C3 credit card computer yet.· And moving a servo might be a start at learning but everyone I show it to will be bored because while kids might have fun moving a servo or blinking an LED, there will be plenty of adults that will say,'you're really getting an understanding' while others will say,'so what?'.· It has to go beyond that with involvement of larger projects I can be involved with and enjoy.
If people don't know how to do something then some of them won't with the propeller.
@linux remarks - Linux started out as a hobby, but look at the revenues being generated by the commercial vendors such as Red Hat. Businesses want commercial support.
@Holly - I won't start another thread about you, I'll just comment here
@forum - One thing that needs to be recognized wrt the Arduino, is that for the most part Arduino users don't focus on the Arduino, whereas Propeller users do focus on the Propeller. That's to say that many(most?) Arduino users just see it as a means to accomplish some goal, like building a toilet seat warmer or something. Propeller users (here anyways) see the Propeller as some form of alien technology, and are more absorbed in the technology than their toilet seat being warm. Some of the best technical discussions anywhere on the web take place in this Propeller forum. I spent years reading the Propeller forum before I actually bough a demo board, just because of the quality of the discussions. I have never seen a post on the Arduino forums at the same depth level as some of these posts, but... I've seen a lot more "interesting" projects developed with an Arduino than I have with a Propeller.
Post Edited (Kevin Wood) : 7/18/2010 1:58:20 AM GMT
The Si570 seems like a fantastic device. All sorts of amazing things are being done with it. Several additional applications suggest themselves as well. I would indeed be interested in participating in a group purchase. Let me know if and/or when you are going to proceed.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who."
That's a really interesting observation.
Agreed too. IMHO, part of that happens to be the Propeller is a point of interest, where some other more or less standard micro just isn't, and that's because a micro is just a micro, unless it's a Propeller. I'm not diminishing the other chips, as they are capable of lots of things, but they all share a lot in common, that is not shared with a Propeller, that's all.
That difference has shown up as lots of "how we do it" discussions as the necessary boot strapping of the chip takes place. Honestly, that's a lot of the fun of it for me. We've got a steady stream of efforts running to do this or that, given how Propellers do things. It's almost never just a straight port, like it would be from one Harvard style to another. Props are Von Newman, and with multi-processors that are concurrent. The SPIN + PASM + (all kinds of other cool stuff now) is something that's different enough to warrant a LOT of effort to not make it so different, or accessible, or whatever.
Those efforts have paid off nicely too. Heck, we no longer have to tell a newbie they can't inline assembly code anymore. That's done, though it's LMM, it's still done. Damn cool, and go down the list for a lot of other similar kinds of things.
I too enjoy the quality of discussion here very much. We have so many smart, and nice people! It's really something else, at least I think so. Deffo a point of sale.
Some of us are working on enabling others to do things, and I think that's where the Arduino has some merit for the creative types. It's ok to just use some standard facility for doing simple things. It's expected because actually programming your own is quite involved, if a number of things must happen at the same time, and interact in different ways. Interrupts require a kernel, and that's the intro to systems level programming, and that's not generally for the newbie.
By contrast, the Propeller actually presents a pretty damn simple, and potent interface, and that contributes to a just write it culture that differs from the comments I see related to other chips, more often than not. A big part of that is the kind of people here, and I think that's a product of the long, and excellent educational focus Parallax has. I can't emphasize enough, just how golden you all are. For me, it's excellent, because I learn something new, and useful every single day.
IMHO, a big part of the problem has been HOW to apply that tech in ways that are more like what is seen elsewhere. We don't have a standard Prop library, for example. What we've got is legos, and that means a lot of discussion about how to assemble them this way and that way. Combine that with the limits of RAM, and there is just enough variance there to power ongoing discussions on how to do the kinds of things we see in libraries for other chips.
So there is the assembling of things, but a piece is missing problem. People are always making new and better pieces. And then there is the assembling of things, but all the pieces won't fit in the container problem, and so people are building out better containers too. To me, I see a nice comp-sci, applied to electronics discussion happening, and that's where the fun is.
Nobody really thinks about that kind of thing on an Arduino, mostly because there isn't any reward for that, other than to show off some mad programming skills. On a prop, that kind of discussion yields a lot, because the chip can deliver a lot more than we really think it can. It's very interesting to go back and read the forum discussions from just a coupla years ago, and think, "man, we are here now?? That was supposed to be Prop II territory", and then of course that leads to, "get the dang thing done already", and so it all goes.
Well, I've written too much. Going to get back to my Propeller now, but I think that's a good comment, and I wanted to riff on it for a while.
Edit: One more thing, regarding "alien tech". Yeah, I think that's deffo true. The thing is really different, and some of those differences play out in surprising ways, and frustrating ways. That is an attraction for me personally, because until I got to work on this device, I had no appreciation for how much we had come to standardize on a lot of ideas. For somebody like Chip to just step back and ask, "what if?", and do it is really radical. And that's what drives the boot strapping efforts and tech discussion seen here regularly. Change a few core things, and a lot of higher level things also change. IMHO, that's not in play so much for anybody else but XMOS, and they've got their boot strapping discussions happening too, just like we do here. I think it's driven by the same core elements.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller Wiki: Share the coolness!
8x8 color 80 Column NTSC Text Object
Wondering how to set tile colors in the graphics_demo.spin?
Safety Tip: Life is as good as YOU think it is!
Post Edited (potatohead) : 7/18/2010 3:26:58 AM GMT
The Arduino module abstracts away the microcontroller module the same way the BS2 modules does for the PIC/SX. The Propeller... well, not so much. Some of the boards/devices make it a bit easier thank others, but still not as easy as it could be. It's generally held that you need a little more tech savvy or experience when using the Propeller.
The thing that makes it a hard sell is that people that are "into the tech" are just as likely to buy & try another product like PIC/AVR/TI/XMOS/etc., becasue they enjoy the technology. It's just the way it is, like having several guitars or classic cars or whatever. Selling to design engineers is even toygher because in addition to a technical slant, they also need to approach things from a cost/benefit perspective.
Okay, so whether anybody agrees with the concept of a pilot system as postulated in Mythical Man Month...
...I think there is some merit to the concept. There are already plan for Prop2 to correct some of the design limitations of Prop1. I think the question that really need to be addressed is "What's wrong with the Propeller". Not to discredit it, but to make the overall platform better. The Propeller ultimately needs to stand on its' own merits.
Most of us in these forums spend our time making the Propeller do things that it was simply never designed to do. Things that its designers (for all their talent and foresight) may never even have contemplated. Things that you either can't do at all with any comparable chip, or can't do with anywhere near the same cost-effectiveness, elegance or simplicity.
The trouble is that these things don't necessarily show off the Propeller to the greatest effect. In fact, in many cases it is just the opposite - you have to be prepared to "peek under the hood" to appreciate just how impressive the achievement is. If you don't, then your reaction is likely to be more of the "so what?" variety. More specifically, "What's so impressive about that? My XXXX can do the same thing, only better! Ok, it takes 57 components to do it and costs 20 times as much, but what's the big deal?"
I've said elsewhere that I think the Arduino-type approach is a good idea in it's own right - but it is not the real answer. I've also said that I don't think trying to find a single "killer app" is the right answer. After reading several of these inter-related threads, I think the answer is to find a domain in which the Prop can be a stunning performer, and concentrate on that - build software tools and boards specifically oriented towards it, design showcase products for it, run competitions in it, advertise in the magazines dedicated to it, participate in the trade shows and conferences about it, etc etc.
I don't know what the domain would be - it might be signal processing, industrial control, industrial robotics, medical appliances, tools and instrumentation, automotive, avionics, or intelligent peripherals. The Propeller is suitable for all these domains - as the people in this forum have demonstrated - but there must be one where the unique requirements of the domain mean that the unique capabilities of the Propeller really make it a hands-down winner. Find that domain, target it, win it, and then use that success to spin off into other areas.
However, while I don't know exactly what the domain is, I do know what the domain probably isn't - games, handheld devices or anything related to consumer electronics. In these domains there is no need for a chip as versatile as the Propeller - these domains are all high volume enough that it is worth spending millions designing silicon specifically for them, just in order to shave a few cents off the final price. Either that, or the domain is already perfectly well serviced by the existing players, and you will be reduced to competing on price alone.
Anybody have any suggestions?
Ross.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Catalina - a FREE C compiler for the Propeller - see Catalina
Post Edited (RossH) : 7/18/2010 6:22:04 AM GMT
I don't think that is at issue. In that scenario, the user of the tech will simply use it where it makes sense for them. The more the merrier, on that. For some, the Prop is another offering they can apply to whatever project they've got going. For others, Props make a nice entry point, where people then explore some. No need to be propeller only, IMHO.
RossH --Agreed. Over the course of these (fun) threads, I've been thinking about that. One idea that struck me earlier was a specialized test gear series, each with specific inputs and output display or data requirements. Once the core methodology was developed on the Prop, dealing with the specific case would be cake, with considerable variation possible on the same core chip! Seems to me, the Prop strength would be having one chip to build on, where using other vendors devices may well include multiple variations, or more testing, due to the kinds of interactions that a Propeller avoids because of it's concurrency, vs threads, interrupts, etc...
That could get right at the heart of "the pilot system", where there is a more robust and consistent path between need and solution. (and I buy that idea, BTW --comes into play often in my niche)
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller Wiki: Share the coolness!
8x8 color 80 Column NTSC Text Object
Wondering how to set tile colors in the graphics_demo.spin?
Safety Tip: Life is as good as YOU think it is!
You know, I think you have just hit on something very important.
Could it be that this forum, populated with such smart, imaginative, creative, enthusiastic people as it is, has become a closed shop?
There have been hundreds of interesting projects discussed here, spectrum analyser, software radio, quad copters, navigation systems, funky video demos, balancing bots, game emulators, and so on and so on.
Is it so that everyone is so focused on this forum that little finds it's way out of here? To Maker or Elektor or Indestructables, or Hack-a-day, or YouTube or any number of other media. It does not take long to see that the Arduino guys are more than happy to let the world know about their home made "toilet seat warmers" via all kinds of channels.
Is this forum just too good?
I for one have been stuck here for longer than is healthy, there is so much going on all the time. Is there a way out?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
For me, the past is not over yet.