Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
SparkFun Inventors Kit Is 'Clever' — Parallax Forums

SparkFun Inventors Kit Is 'Clever'

ercoerco Posts: 20,259
edited 2011-08-26 04:22 in General Discussion
http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1362&doc_id=232310&

An Arduino-based WAM clone is "clever" and stealing headlines!

Time to turn on the charm, Parallax marketing! I still say your WAM kit is awesome. But if it takes targeting 5-7 year-olds to bask in the spotlight, it might be time for a makeover of the material and packaging to get that idea across. Simplification is good, you'll pull in lots of Chip-o-Phobics along with the kiddies.

A "Science Fair" kit might be a good umbrella or place to start. And throw in some plastic accessories to get them started. A superball and a pinball flipper to attach to a servo. And a propeller. A real plastic bladed propeller that pushes air from a motor! And an IR remote. THAT's instant magic.

Sell the sizzle, not the steak! :)
«13

Comments

  • rod1963rod1963 Posts: 752
    edited 2011-08-15 10:41
    Looks to be really neat and a great intro to controllers and electronics for kids. Sparkfun can't even keep it in stock.

    Arduino is a perfect fit too since it was designed for non-techies and it's target audience as well.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,259
    edited 2011-08-15 10:45
    Aaaarrrgggghhhh..............!
  • Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
    edited 2011-08-15 10:55
    It's a cheap clone of this...
    http://www.parallax.com/StoreSearchResults/tabid/768/List/0/SortField/4/ProductID/506/Default.aspx?txtSearch=PE+Kit

    Parallax has had the concept for years..

    What sells this isn't the kit itself its the "hype" and this..
    http://www.sparkfun.com/tutorial/AIK/ARDX-EG-SPAR-WEB-REV10.pdf

    I've been chasing this concept myself for a while now..
    http://www.gadgetgangster.com/tutorials

    OBC
  • edited 2011-08-15 11:08
    erco wrote: »
    http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1362

    An Arduino-based WAM clone is "clever" and stealing headlines!

    Time to turn on the charm, Parallax marketing! I still say your WAM kit is awesome. But if it takes targeting 5-7 year-olds to bask in the spotlight, it might be time for a makeover of the material and packaging to get that idea across. Simplification is good, you'll pull in lots of Chip-o-Phobics along with the kiddies.

    A "Science Fair" kit might be a good umbrella or place to start. And throw in some plastic accessories to get them started. A superball and a pinball flipper to attach to a servo. And a propeller. A real plastic bladed propeller that pushes air from a motor! And an IR remote. THAT's instant magic.

    Sell the sizzle, not the steak! :)

    A two dollar PIC with BASIC (equivalent of a bootloader) is cheaper than Arduino.
    People aren't learning coding with cut and paste code and they aren't learning wiring or soldering with a pre-made shield.

    The only hard part is convincing people to buy a $60 Pikit 2 but spread among a handful of PICs, you don't have to spend the $60 for a programmer but you have to spend $30 every time you buy an Arduino.

    I'm glad people have that kind of money to just buy whatever to save them wiring, prototyping and coding but the result is not learning to do everything yourself.

    A ten dollar chip means buying a $50 prototyping board. Stick with what is cheap and you won't be losing money out of your pocket.
  • Roy ElthamRoy Eltham Posts: 3,000
    edited 2011-08-15 13:05
    I dunno if I would call it a cheap clone, OBC. It's got more interesting stuff in it like a servo, a motor, relay, and other interesting components, and it's the same price.
    I, of course, like the PEK better, but I think it would compare better if it included the extras they included.
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-15 16:29
    Not much really new in the AIK, but then few things are truly new. Even the paper templates idea is decades old (but it's still a good idea nevertheless).

    Clever is as clever does. Back in 2002 or so, Nathan Seidle started SparkFun, and I started Budget Robotics. We even had the same Web host and shopping cart software, and every once in a while we exchanged product ideas via email. An early offering of his was a "robot experimenter's kit" consisting of a long solderless breadboard, a couple of surplus motors, and assorted odds and ends. It was simple and easily definable, if far from novel.

    Ideas are like viruses and children -- they'll keep growing in the right environment. I seem to remember hearing in a 2009 video that SparkFun was up to $15 or $20 million a year. Nate employs about 85 people, last time I heard, and the business keeps growing. I'm still BR's only employee, and my growth rate looks like a flat road on a flat desert on a very flat planet!

    Now, who's the clever one here?!

    To be fair to myself, I do other things for a living, and make robots (and write books about 'em) as a hobby. Still, you can't fault success. If the AIK is a knock-off, and I'm not sure it is, what counts is the combination of things they offer. The BOE-Bot wasn't the first robot kit to ever come out, and you can hardly consider that its design has a lot of Wow Factor. But I wouldn't be surprised if it outsold all the other educational robotics kits from other sources put together. It's the solid metal chassis, the overall design that's ideal for classroom use, the BS2, the BOE board, and especially it's the documentation.

    We all know the PropBOE is coming out, and likely a PropBot, full robotics classroom curriculum, etc. I doubt there will be anything earth shattering in these that we haven't seen before, but I'm willing to bet it'll be clever.

    -- Gordon
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-15 16:42
    Chuckz wrote: »
    People aren't learning coding with cut and paste code and they aren't learning wiring or soldering with a pre-made shield.

    But is that a requirement? People learn what they want to learn. If they want to learn how to solder they'll get a kit that requires or teaches soldering. But if their aim is something else, having a pre-made module or shield sidesteps what might have been a barrier to entry. If the idea is to convert wannabes into customers, then it's important to provide a product that reaches out to their goals, rather than a product that defines their goals.

    As an example, I'm not particularly keen to learn which registers do what in a microcontroller, in order to program the thing. It's just not in my sphere of interest. Yet not long ago you had to know this stuff if you wanted to program the typical PIC. (Early on Atmel fostered support for dealing with chip registers from within the compiler, and not surprisingly their product line made a lot of inroads because of it. The registers are still there, of course, and you can still directly manipulate them, if that's your aim.)

    Yes, we'll probably see a lot of projects made by simply mashing together premade modules. Their creators won't fully know how it all works. But at least they got that far. Their foot is in the door, and if only 1-in-100 decides to continue their education and learn electronics and programming, it'll be one more that wouldn't have traveled that road in the first place.

    -- Gordon
  • edited 2011-08-15 17:01
    But is that a requirement? People learn what they want to learn. If they want to learn how to solder they'll get a kit that requires or teaches soldering. But if their aim is something else, having a pre-made module or shield sidesteps what might have been a barrier to entry. If the idea is to convert wannabes into customers, then it's important to provide a product that reaches out to their goals, rather than a product that defines their goals.

    As an example, I'm not particularly keen to learn which registers do what in a microcontroller, in order to program the thing. It's just not in my sphere of interest. Yet not long ago you had to know this stuff if you wanted to program the typical PIC. (Early on Atmel fostered support for dealing with chip registers from within the compiler, and not surprisingly their product line made a lot of inroads because of it. The registers are still there, of course, and you can still directly manipulate them, if that's your aim.)

    I decided that I want to be a producer and not just a consumer.

    The difference is if you know how to make it yourself, you will be either making and selling your product.

    If you don't know how to make it yourself, you will always be buying someone else's PCB, kit or project.

    If you have money, it won't be a problem. If you don't have money then it will be a problem.

    I want some learning and not just a collection of products.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,259
    edited 2011-08-15 17:31
    What sells this isn't the kit itself its the "hype" and this..
    http://www.sparkfun.com/tutorial/AIK/ARDX-EG-SPAR-WEB-REV10.pdf

    OBC

    Agreed, but per Gordon, it's how you define success. Like it or not, these days, PR is king, and hyping the crowd mentality is a big part of that. Whether it's getting on HackaDay or Gizmodo or the blog de jour, that's what people are looking at. Personally, I hate the iPhone obsession, but these days, you better have an iPhone app for your product or you won't go too far.

    There's nothing wrong with jumping on a good bandwagon, but it does require a lot of effort and considerable flexibility, something corporate America struggles with (along with anything "open source").
  • edited 2011-08-15 20:04
    erco wrote: »
    Agreed, but per Gordon, it's how you define success. Like it or not, these days, PR is king, and hyping the crowd mentality is a big part of that. Whether it's getting on HackaDay or Gizmodo or the blog de jour, that's what people are looking at. Personally, I hate the iPhone obsession, but these days, you better have an iPhone app for your product or you won't go too far.

    There's nothing wrong with jumping on a good bandwagon, but it does require a lot of effort and considerable flexibility, something corporate America struggles with (along with anything "open source").

    I was in the Verizon store and a woman was trying to keep the salesman from selling a smartphone to her daughter by saying, "I never needed a smartphone." I don't want a smart phone because the wireless companies want to sell me a $30 data plan and I would buy a smartphone that did Wifi if it wasn't for the fact that I had to buy a data plan because the wireless companies don't want you sitting by a router and using it for free.

    I think Open Source is where you offer your ideas and you don't get paid. Instead of the internet trolls stealing your ideas, the people who make the money are the board makers and companies that sell the project.

    The iPhone may be good for remote control projects but it adds a layer of abstraction that I don't need to use microcontrollers and the iPhone only represents people who can throw money away towards your microcontroller project.
  • Kevin WoodKevin Wood Posts: 1,266
    edited 2011-08-15 21:09
    >>> Parallax has had the concept for years..

    I've been on these forums since about 2004/2005, and I'll say this... there has been very little change (if any...) to what's being offered in the BS2 line. IMO, it's in need of an overhaul. There's much that could be done to make the line a better value in both price and features.

    The "What's a Microcotroller" kit, as good as it is, no longer has the competitive advantage that it had 5-10 years ago. Nor does the BS2 series. And Parallax, like all companies, needs to keep up with what the market is looking for, or lose market share. This is just basic business economics.
  • SRLMSRLM Posts: 5,045
    edited 2011-08-16 03:03
    Personally, I'm attracted to those kits for new learners. I like that they 30 minutes or less, and I like the overlays. I don't care if they're a million years old, I just don't like looking over student's circuits and finding the same wiring mistake over and over again (although it's fun to be able to debug a circuit without looking at it).

    And I don't think it doesn't matter if the people who use this kit are being "coddled" just because all they have to do is hook up the wires. If they pursue an engineering career they won't be scared for life by this kit (most won't, anyway). I remember growing up, playing in the safe comfort of my lego blocks that always fit together properly. It was nice.
    We all know the PropBOE is coming out, and likely a PropBot, full robotics classroom curriculum, etc.

    That's my vote for the top secret Parallax project: a PropBOE bot. The new school year is starting up soon...
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-08-16 03:27
    Chuckz,
    People aren't learning coding with cut and paste code and they aren't learning wiring or soldering with a pre-made shield.

    True enough but consider this. At age 8 or 9 I was bought a Philips Electronic Engineer Kit. Basically a collection or resistors, caps, transistors, buttons. Also a speaker, a pot or two, a ferrite antenna rod etc . All these parts could be used to assemble simple circuits, an organ, a MW radio, a light detector etc etc. All you had to do was poke spring clips into a board as indicated by a cardboard overlays with circuits layouts on them, then use the spring clips to hold the components in place as per the layout. Easy to make things, easy to take them down for the next experiment. There was a nice book with all circuit diagrams and explanations.

    You could call that "cut and paste" in hardware for the day. And for sure no soldering. But it was a damn good intro to electronics for a kid who knows almost nothing and a lot easier going and more flexible than soldering things up. At least after that you know that there is such a thing as electronics. Those who were sufficiently inspired were soon wanting to get into obtaining their own parts and soldering up permanent creations.
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2011-08-16 03:36
    No soldering in the Philips EE kits?

    And how do you think I learned to solder?
    (Replacing the transistors because I tended to blow them up... )

    And frankly, the springs annoyed the H! out of me.
    A proper experimenter board would have been nicer.
    (Back then I did manage to 'create' a few circuits, but to actually transfer them to the EE system was just about impossible)
  • TorTor Posts: 2,010
    edited 2011-08-16 04:19
    Well, I'm happy that I didn't start sniffing lead smoke at that early age anyway.. it's bad enough with all that happened later during the educational years. Now that I'm back into soldering I'm really glad there's this air-sucking flexible tube right over the soldering area in the electronics lab here at $work. The first evening I used it I wasn't really aware of it and didn't adjust the tube properly, so the soldering smoke got into my face and nose. I got sick. To me it felt like some kind of reaction to all that time of soldering in the past.
    Now that I use the equipment properly there's no solder smoke and no ill health effects.

    -Tor
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-08-16 04:52
    No, no soldering on EE kits.
    Not sure how your transistors were supplied but mine just had the normal bare wires that you poked into the spring clips. The wires snapped off the transistors before I managed to blow them up. Hence the need to find a source of components and start to learn soldering and "proper" construction.
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2011-08-16 05:21
    On my kit the transistors were soldered onto little square PCBs, with small holes in the corners for the springs to poke through.
    (The wires connecting the transistor to the rest of the circuit then locked the pcb in place)
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-16 10:51
    Tor wrote: »
    Well, I'm happy that I didn't start sniffing lead smoke at that early age anyway.

    There's virtually no lead in the smoke from soldering -- lead is way too heavy to go airborne. It's the rosin flux, and it's from trees after all, so it must be good for you! :-)

    Seriously, some people are more susceptible to rosin fumes, just as some people get sick smelling the creosote in wood burning fireplaces. These don't bother me, but organic solvents like naphtha will make me seriously ill for days.

    -- Gordon
  • Maddie the InternMaddie the Intern Posts: 81
    edited 2011-08-16 11:00
    Hi everyone!
    Sorry, I just saw this thread today (I know, I know, getting my wisdom teeth out is no excuse! Back to work!).
    erco wrote: »
    Simplification is good

    I like this, erco. I've done a TON of research (more than I care to think about!) and there is definitely a market out there that is into simplifying for marketing!

    A great example is this Ritz cracker box:
    ritz-back-side-panel-lr1.jpg

    Simple shapes and colors- caught my attention!
    We're always looking at all different ways to market- thanks for the heads up about Sparkfun's Inventor's Kit!

    -MaddieTheIntern
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-16 11:00
    Kevin Wood wrote: »
    the BS2 line ... in need of an overhaul

    Agreed. A BS3, with true analog inputs, more RAM, faster processor, etc. would kick some serious rump. It would only work, however, if it's a drop-in replacement for the BS2. So that means a 5V chip (or 3.3V that's fully 5V tolerant), support for PBasic2.5, and so on. Otherwise it won't get adopted as a replacement in the existing BS2 applications, such as the Boe-bot, which is heavily used in schools.

    IMO such a product would not take away from Propeller sales, and in fact would complement the product line.

    -- Gordon
  • Roy ElthamRoy Eltham Posts: 3,000
    edited 2011-08-16 11:24
    Gordon,
    How can it be a drop in replacement and also have analog inputs? I don't think a BS3 is the right answer for now or the future. Personally I really like the PropBOE solution, especially when (in the future) it can be coded for with GCC, along with spin/pasm, propbasic, and so on.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,259
    edited 2011-08-16 11:57
    Roy Eltham wrote: »
    Gordon,
    How can it be a drop in replacement and also have analog inputs?

    Check out the brand new PicAxe 20M2. 16 IOs, including direct ADC inputs, touch sensors, DAC, 1.8V operation, multitasking. $4. Ouch.

    A BS3 was needed yesterday.
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-16 12:13
    Roy Eltham wrote: »
    How can it be a drop in replacement and also have analog inputs?

    They're only analog inputs when the multiplexer is activated. Otherwise they're regular digital I/O. Same play as the Arduino.

    In a perfect world we'd have both a BS3, to keep that updated, and the Prop line. There's room for both, because (even though there is cross over) they're attractive to different segments of the market.

    -- Gordon
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-16 12:28
    erco wrote: »
    Check out the brand new PicAxe 20M2. 16 IOs, including direct ADC inputs, touch sensors, DAC, 1.8V operation, multitasking. $4. Ouch.

    They've done an impressive job with the new M2 line. There are some under-the-hood limitations of these new chips, and you encounter them -- like you do with anything -- when you sit down and do hands-on development. For instance you can't select a higher clock when you use multi-tasking. I needed to support a higher serial baud rate (damn MIDI and its 31250 bps speed), but then couldn't also use multiple tasking.

    Of course the Prop handles this without skipping a beat, but that's not the point. The fact that these M2 chips do what they do, starting at $3 (for the 08M2) is the kicker.

    To addend my comment to Roy, the Arduino Pro Mini is a "drop in" replacement for the BS2. They don't push the fact -- quite the opposite, really -- but the pinouts are the same. You can't use a BOE to program it (inverted serial), but as the Pro Mini already has USB you can bypass the circuitry on the board and go straight to the Arduino. For <$20 it's not bad.

    Ah, how the world turns.

    -- Gordon
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-16 12:30
    Roy Eltham wrote: »
    I really like the PropBOE solution

    Just as a BTW, me too. I think it'll be Parallax's next killer product.

    -- Gordon
  • davejamesdavejames Posts: 4,047
    edited 2011-08-16 12:32
    agreed. A bs3, with true analog inputs, more ram, faster processor, etc. Would kick some serious rump. It would only work, however, if it's a drop-in replacement for the bs2. So that means a 5v chip (or 3.3v that's fully 5v tolerant), support for pbasic2.5, and so on. Otherwise it won't get adopted as a replacement in the existing bs2 applications, such as the boe-bot, which is heavily used in schools.

    Imo such a product would not take away from propeller sales, and in fact would complement the product line.

    -- gordon

    Bee-Ess-Three! Bee-Ess-Three!! Bee-Ess-Three!!!
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,259
    edited 2011-08-16 13:24
    davejames wrote: »
    Bee-Ess-Three! Bee-Ess-Three!! Bee-Ess-Three!!!

    Allow me to translate for my good friend davejames: BS3! BS3! BS3!
  • MicrocontrolledMicrocontrolled Posts: 2,461
    edited 2011-08-16 13:55
    You all know that I love Parallax, but really, the BS2 is the beginner product here. Parallax seems to be pushing the Propeller a lot and for good reason, but it is by no means a beginner product. As stated, a BS3 would be the key to even up the score between the Arduino and Parallax in the education market. Several years ago Parallax was the leader, and it needs to regain that. A BS3 with a Propeller chip running a BASIC interpreter would be awesome. You could introduce a new type of BASIC with different capabilities utilizing the powers of the Propeller. Not just PropBASIC on a SPINstamp, but really something unique.

    However, I doubt that this will happen. Parallax is going more professional, and has been ever since the launch of the Propeller. The starting of Parallax Semiconductor confirms this. It will only be a matter of 5 years before they drop the BS2 completely.
  • Kevin WoodKevin Wood Posts: 1,266
    edited 2011-08-16 14:14
    In a perfect world we'd have both a BS3, to keep that updated, and the Prop line. There's room for both, because (even though there is cross over) they're attractive to different segments of the market.

    Considering that it was the Basic Stamp that effectively put Parallax "on the map", it makes no sense to neglect continued development in the product line. The Propeller is good and all, but I can't imagine that it has the sales figures that the BS1/2 have. As mentioned, it serves a different market than more traditional microcontrollers.
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-08-16 14:53
    but as the Pro Mini already has USB

    What am I saying? It doesn't. You have to use a USB dongle.

    I've been looking at too many boards recently. After a while they all spin together in the windmills of the mind. Or something like that.

    -- Gordon
Sign In or Register to comment.