Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
New prop developments ? — Parallax Forums

New prop developments ?

FORDFORD Posts: 221
edited 2010-08-23 18:03 in Propeller 1
Hi All,
I am looking at integrating prop into our products, and obviously need to redesign our pcb's to do this (currenty use basic stamps).

Are there any upcoming changes to the prop (ie: prop 2) that I should be aware of or wait for ?

I havent been on the forum here for ages and am not up to speed with any of the latest developments.

Cheers,
Chris,
Western Australia

Comments

  • TubularTubular Posts: 4,717
    edited 2010-08-11 22:29
    Hi Chris,
    The Prop 2 is looking like an exciting beast, but is still a little way off yet.
    In the mean time there is a "Spin Stamp" that might provide you with an immediate upgrade path, depending on your application
    http://www.parallax.com/Store/Microcontrollers/PropellerTools/tabid/143/ProductID/448/List/1/Default.aspx?SortField=ProductName,ProductName

    Tell us a bit more about your application, as there are other options available too. I'm developing a product that adds analog, real time clock and micro SD to the Spin Stamp offering. It'll be built here in oz.

    regards
    Lachlan
  • FORDFORD Posts: 221
    edited 2010-08-15 17:37
    Thanks Lachlan,

    Our use is industrial fluid monitoring.
    We have about 1300 units out there, using stamps.

    I have done some basic development with the prop before, but have lost touch with it recently, so if I get back into looking at using it in our applications, I dont want to develop pcb's etc, to then find that the next prop version is only a short time away.

    Is there any mechanical specs / pinouts for the prop 2 around ?

    Cheers,
    Chris
  • TubularTubular Posts: 4,717
    edited 2010-08-15 17:57
    Chris,
    Lots of information is scattered through the threads, but this is a starting point for what to hope for Prop in 2:-
    http://propeller.wikispaces.com/Propeller+II

    Its a little out of date - I believe we're now looking at maybe 144 pins and 96 i/o, still 8 cogs, 256kB RAM, external SDRAM interface...
  • Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
    edited 2010-08-15 18:37
    Also, there is some very good information from the horse's mouth regarding the Prop2 here: http://www.parallax.com/tabid/766/Default.aspx

    OBC
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2010-08-15 18:53
    FORD wrote:
    Are there any upcoming changes to the prop (ie: prop 2) that I should be aware of or wait for?
    Be aware of? Certainly! Wait for? No. In the tech world, if one always waited for the "next big thing just over the horizon" he would always be waiting. The Prop I is a high-value-for-the-dollar solution that's available now. 'No waiting required!

    -Phil
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2010-08-15 20:01
    Ford,

    As Phil says there is no point waiting for the Prop II or even thinking about it at this time.

    Whilst it will surely be great when it comes the Prop II is not going to mean the end of life for the current Prop. They will coexist in the long term. Whatever you design around the Prop I now will not suddenly need redesigning for the lack of devices.

    Many have stated that we should think of Prop II as almost a totally different device for different purposes. That seems to be true if, for example, your application required low power operation the Prop II may be less suitable than Prop I.
  • Invent-O-DocInvent-O-Doc Posts: 768
    edited 2010-08-17 12:13
    If a Stamp can do it, then the regular prop should be more than powerful enough for you.
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2010-08-17 13:39
    To expand a little on what others have said ...

    Although the Prop I and Prop II have the same name and most of the architecture of the cogs looks the same, they will be somewhat different and appeal to different markets.

    In particular, the operating voltages will be different with the Prop II requiring one voltage for internal operation plus 3.3V for the I/O. The Prop II will not be able to operate at the same low operating currents as the Prop I, so it won't be as suitable for battery operation. The Prop II will be somewhat limited in possible packaging due to the large number of pins. There won't be a DIP package as a result.

    The Prop I and Prop II will not be strictly software compatible. You will certainly have to recompile existing Prop I programs for the Prop II and you will probably have to make changes because some things will be done differently, particularly those involving the I/O pins and assembly language. I suspect that the Spin interpreter will hide some of the changes for code written in Spin and library objects will have their assembly portions modified as needed.

    Note that this is all the opinion of someone who is familiar with existing public disclosures. I don't have any inside knowledge.

    Bottom line: Don't wait for the Prop II unless it's expected to have "must have" features. Because there are things the Prop I can do that the Prop II can't, both will be around for a long time.
  • John R.John R. Posts: 1,376
    edited 2010-08-17 13:43
    Extrapolating some of the timelines for development and testing that Chip has laid out at UPEC and UPEW, it would seem reasonable that Prop II won't be out until the 2nd half of Calendar 2011, if all goes well, and everything works 100% right the first time through.

    As recently as the time frame between UPEC and UPEW, the proposed pinout has changed. (more pins for SDRAM)

    So, confirming above suggestions, don't wait. Go with Prop I for now!
  • Ken GraceyKen Gracey Posts: 7,401
    edited 2010-08-17 22:32
    Hello Chris!

    Welcome back to the mix. Assuming your project is along the similar lines of a prior project I remember then you've got the perfect controller.

    Don't wait for Prop2. The release date is a moving target and after talking with Chip today I believe it could be another year.

    Start your project and learn the architecture. I can assign an engineer to assist you once I know the details.

    Sincerely,

    Ken Gracey
    Parallax Inc.
  • FORDFORD Posts: 221
    edited 2010-08-22 21:39
    WOW - What a heap of responses, sincere thanks to all :)

    I have read all replies, and if I change over, will go with Prop 1 as you all say. My main issue was with circuit board design changes, but if its a year or more away, I'll just go prop 1 as suggested.

    Hi Ken,
    Hope alls well for you, say hello to Chuck and Chip for me please :)
    Thank you for your tech support offer, I will take that up if needed, (wouldnt bother you with minor stuff though).

    At this stage we are still fairly locked into stamps with so many of our pcb designs relying on them, we are weighing up the work required to change, against the cost / feature advantages. I really want to go prop, but its quite a task to convert 10 years of work over, on 6 different current pcb designs.

    (Also, having basic stamps performing so reliably for so long, doesnt give any real urgency to force a change).

    But if we werent so busy I would have changed over quite a while ago.

    Thanks again to all for your responses, I will start gently moving towards prop1

    best wishes to all...

    Chris,
    Western Australia
  • BradCBradC Posts: 2,601
    edited 2010-08-23 00:06
    FORD wrote: »
    Thanks again to all for your responses, I will start gently moving towards prop1

    best wishes to all...

    Chris,
    Western Australia

    Yell if you need a hand.

    Brad
    Perth, Western Australia
  • Dr_AculaDr_Acula Posts: 5,484
    edited 2010-08-23 02:57
    Happy to help from over here in South Australia as well.
  • FORDFORD Posts: 221
    edited 2010-08-23 18:03
    Heck, we could start our own Aussie forum :)

    thanks for the offers fella's...

    Cheers,
    Chris
Sign In or Register to comment.