Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Prop 2 plans? Who else is planning a project around the prop 2? — Parallax Forums

Prop 2 plans? Who else is planning a project around the prop 2?

kf4ixmkf4ixm Posts: 529
edited 2011-01-26 01:29 in Propeller 1
Hi all, i was just thinking about my current weather station, that is entirely of one-wire devices, and how i would like to redesign the whole thing to use the new prop 2 when it comes out.the main reason is because the prop 2 will have analog i/o. i like the one-wire approach, don't get me wrong, but it can be kinda troublesome at times. my plans are to use all analog output based sensors with the prop 2 doing all the processing of data and outputting that data into a serial stream to be used by software on a connected pc and to have a video out of the prop 2 to show a real-time screen of all parameters.

I'm just curious who else has plans for the new features and willing to share with the rest of us.:idea:

Comments

  • Bobb FwedBobb Fwed Posts: 1,119
    edited 2010-09-22 16:05
    I am planning on using it for a project I am working on. Currently I have to suffice with 2 propeller 1's, but in the future I expect to fit into one propeller. I also hope to use a wider array of USB devices with it. Specifically a G3 (wireless) device for remote monitoring. (again) currently I am working on getting GPRS up and running with the prop 1, and settling for the slower communication speeds.

    It will be quite nice to have integrated ADCs, so I can remove the MCP3008s I have (I have 3 of them on one PCB), and get faster sampling directly on the Prop.
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 18,069
    edited 2010-09-22 17:06
    I will be doing Prop II boards and I know Bill Henning will too.
  • Bill HenningBill Henning Posts: 6,445
    edited 2010-09-22 17:10
    You are right :)

    "Morpheus 2" will be Propeller 2 based :-) and I am considering several other products.
    Cluso99 wrote: »
    I will be doing Prop II boards and I know Bill Henning will too.
  • BigFootBigFoot Posts: 259
    edited 2010-09-22 17:42
    Our next PoS terminal is based on the Propeller 2, in fact the board
    is almost ready to go. We feel that the system will actually cost
    less than the dual Prop 1 configuration that we use now.

    Russ
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2010-09-22 19:44
    It's too soon for me. A Prop I in the hand is worth a bushel of Prop IIs in -- dare I say? -- limbo. :)

    -Phil
  • TubularTubular Posts: 4,717
    edited 2010-09-22 21:22
    Huge big plans for Prop 2. I've been practicing soldering 0.5mm LPC's in anticipation...
  • BigFootBigFoot Posts: 259
    edited 2010-09-23 18:12
    Tubular,

    Better do a little more practicing using .4 mm spacing.

    Russ :(...
  • Ken GraceyKen Gracey Posts: 7,401
    edited 2011-01-18 20:51
    Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) wrote: »
    It's too soon for me. A Prop I in the hand is worth a bushel of Prop IIs in -- dare I say? -- limbo. :)

    -Phil

    Same for me. Use what we offer for the best results.

    Ken Gracey
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-01-18 23:21
    I'm looking forward to finally being able to have a Z80 emulation and complete 64K CP/M computer including video terminal working from a single chip without the hassle of adding external RAM.
    I know, I'm crazy.
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 18,069
    edited 2011-01-18 23:45
    I jumped here with false hopes we may have had some news :(
  • Clock LoopClock Loop Posts: 2,069
    edited 2011-01-21 09:41
    I would hope the code used on prop2 can be code made for prop 1.

    Naturally some issues arrise, but if the upscale from prop1 to prop2 isn't too painful, people will use the prop2 just because.

    (except for DIP projects)


    I have no plans for prop2 because I have not even reached my personal limits on what the prop 1 can do.
    (except for my desire to make a spdif mixer out of the prop)

    The prop1 has not even made its world tour yet. Its just beginning to grow in popularity.
  • WBA ConsultingWBA Consulting Posts: 2,935
    edited 2011-01-23 21:15
    I have a few different ideas for Prop II but won't even think of them further until it's out. Have too many Prop I unfinished projects. The first project I would like to finish Prop 1 DIP40 board with the Prop II. Depending on the final package used for Prop II, it can be accomplished many ways.
  • HShankoHShanko Posts: 402
    edited 2011-01-24 10:47
    I have a 2 Prop 1 design I'd like to move to a single Prop 2 implemention. Though may not.

    I'm actually awaiting for Prop 2 to be released and Prop 2 ProtoBoard to be available. When Prop 1 Protoboards came out I got a 6-pack. Will start with a single one when the Prop 2 is available. I've not yet done all I want with the original ProtoBoards, and have some spares still. Great starting format for many projects.
  • Chris_DChris_D Posts: 305
    edited 2011-01-24 16:18
    While I am happy working in the "now" with the prop I, I must admit I certainly look at my current project in a different way knowing that the Prop II is down the road. I still have hundreds of hours of coding to get the project to the point where I want it but at this point in time I also know the end result will not be as efficient as I would like. So, I make notes of certain areas of the project where a future version based on the Prop II could easily resolve any performance issues. I sure won't stop what I am doing to wait for the Prop II, that would just be crazy, or should I say the withdrawl would drive me crazy ;-)

    In reality though, I think it is good to think about both props in parallel. By the time the prop II gets here, I should have a pretty good handle on what I want to do with it. The tranistion should be smooth.

    Chris
  • HumanoidoHumanoido Posts: 5,770
    edited 2011-01-24 18:58
    Since the Prop 2 is not available, I'm not waiting. I've taken the specs of the Prop 2 and used several Prop 1s to approximately equal it in terms of speed and HUB memory. In general terms, I now have a Prop 2 made up of Prop 1s.
  • localrogerlocalroger Posts: 3,452
    edited 2011-01-24 19:53
    Don't forget that the P1 has some advantages of its own. Its larger process makes its gates less leaky so it is *much* better at low-power operations. If you're doing battery power, especially long-term battery power, you should use P1 if you can. P2 will not be going into standby mode to work for months on 2xAA battery.

    P2 will also require separate 3v3 and 1v8 power supplies for the I/O and core, respectively. That's what you pay for 160 MHz and the other goodies.

    Also, as we all know, P2 will only be available in SMT packages. I am not horribly bothered by this myself but there is a place in the world for stuff old people and kids can see.

    So I wouldn't count P1 out yet. I suspect P1 will remain a good choice for a lot of applications even though P2 exists. And should P1.5 ever appear, with P1 process but 64 I/O, that's a whole nother market.
  • potatoheadpotatohead Posts: 10,261
    edited 2011-01-24 20:12
    Apple, Atari, C64. They will fit :)
  • AleAle Posts: 2,363
    edited 2011-01-25 01:56
    heater: Have you considered on getting a eZ80F92 or similar ? /runs and hides/ ;-)
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-01-25 02:39
    Ale,

    Ha! Yes I have. But I like my Z80's to come in DIP packages. If I'm going to spend time getting familiar with yet another mcu it's going to be something more interesting. The "chip that shall remain nameless" for example.

    I'm glad Zilog does not use that old logo any more or they might be wanting to have words with me. (Is parody a fair defence against Trade Mark abuse charges?)
  • AleAle Posts: 2,363
    edited 2011-01-25 06:18
    If you accept PLCC you can still get the Z80180 :). It has bank switching built in up to 1 MB :). And is slightly faster than the z80. :).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-01-25 07:53
    Here is one implemented in an FPGA, that runs at up to 35 MHz in a Spartan 2:

    http://opencores.org/project,t80

    It could run a lot faster in a newer device.
  • lanternfishlanternfish Posts: 366
    edited 2011-01-25 15:54
    The video display project I was working on really needs the extra speed and main memory that the Prop II will provide (to keep the cost down). And so we have abandoned the project for now. I can press on with some less esoteric projects to expand my knowledge of Prop I, PASM and Spin.
  • zoopydogsitzoopydogsit Posts: 174
    edited 2011-01-25 19:30
    To be honest, I can't see that I'll have any use I'll have for a Prop 2. Unless I wanted to get into vision processing (sure, who wouldn't but I have other priorities!). Two voltage rails, greater power consumption (and heat to dissipate), more smaller pins to try to solder. Inevitably leading me to have to buy a pre-built daughter board (chip + regulators) to build it into anything. Not that compelling - sorry.

    I'd still love to see the Prop-1B (also known as the Prop 1.5), it's a Prop 1 with 64 I/O lines. It's already enabled in the code, just need the chip! This would solve a number of problems (rather than being creative with design to juggle a pin shortage) and would really enhance the Prop's capability. I'd love to find out if that's still on the cards and whether we'll ever eventually see it. But then again, there are coding advantages of connecting 2 or more props together (haven't done it, but I can see the advantages).
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-01-25 22:13
    Leon, Ale,

    Stop it now guys, if I wanted to do all of that I would have done all of that. Newer faster Z80's and Z80's in FPGA's is kind of dull because, well, it's been done. The Prop was/is new territory to investigate. I'm glad I went the way I did. Don't forget the whole 8080/Z80 emulation thing was initially just an exercise for me by which to learn what a Prop can do and get into Spin/PASM. It was either to be the emulation or the Prop as I/O video peripheral to a real Z80 as done now by the N8VEM group.

    What I really wanted to do with the Prop at the time I discovered it was to create a digital crossover for loudspeaker systems. I have a pet algorithm that implements the required filters, it's basically an "emulation" of the analog filters used in an active crossover from the Rane Corporation. See attachment. This algorithm has been working on a PC sound system very successfully for years. I'd just like to see it in a self contained little box.

    I'm still not sure the Pro has the horse power or I/O capability for that crossover but I suspect the Pro II will.
    pdf
    pdf
    linriley.pdf
    1M
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-01-25 22:26
    I'd use a DSP for that.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-01-25 22:44
    Leon,

    Which one?. I want at least stereo in, stereo out split to bas, mid, tweeter channels. normal 16 bit 44K sampling. I want to have a little screen showing the cut off frequencies. and allowing adjustments. Perhaps also have it adjustable via USB.

    Looks like the Prop II would be perfect. Else I'm leaning toward the "chip that shall remain nameless"

    It's building a good A/D and D/A setup that is the stumbling block for me.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-01-25 22:53
    An XMOS chip would be overkill for that, I'd use a dsPIC and a codec. Microchip even has a low-cost demo board you could use:

    http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=1406&dDocName=en534506

    It's just under $60.
  • dwelvedwelve Posts: 21
    edited 2011-01-26 00:58
    A dsPIC would be overkill for that, I'd use a Prop 2 and some grit. Parallax will even have a low-cost demo board you will eventually be able to use.

    Remind me to post a link to the Prop 2 demo board when it comes up.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-01-26 01:29
    dwelve,

    Do you know something about a Demo board for the Prop II that we don't ?

    Whatever CPU I'd be happy for any kind of board that provided enough analog audi channels and did not cost an arm and a leg.
Sign In or Register to comment.