Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
PCWorld touting the Arduino — Parallax Forums

PCWorld touting the Arduino

Ron CzapalaRon Czapala Posts: 2,418
edited 2011-10-24 15:15 in General Discussion
The November issue of PCWorld has an article touting the Arduino with help from LadyAda (Adafruit.com).

She describes it as "the glue people use to connect tasks together"...

Maybe Parallax should send them a write-up on the multi-core capabilities of the Propeller.

- Ron
«13

Comments

  • rod1963rod1963 Posts: 752
    edited 2011-10-13 14:47
    People don't want to read about chip specs they're more impressed by results. Arduino gets press IMO because they went after the non-geek market segment with a simple and elegant development platform with a human friendly software suite that allows people to do things with micros without having to live, eat and breath embedded systems.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-10-13 14:54
    It also has the advantage of a standard interface for add-on boards called shields. There are lots of them and they come with software which makes them very easy to use by non-programmers. The Arduino boards and shields are relatively cheap, which is another reason why the system is so popular. I can't see the typical Arduino user being interested in the Propeller.
  • PJAllenPJAllen Banned Posts: 5,065
    edited 2011-10-13 16:11
    They do projects.
    Results matter.
    Stop grousing.
    Get your projects out there.

    I have a few nanos and I've been assisting an arduino guy with his IR tx/rx. It's easy enough to pick up, so is Spin.
    I wouldn't touch a "shield" with a 10-foot pole.
    I think the Atmel micros are somewhere between the Stamp's PIC and the Propeller, sort of like the SX.

    And that's how I see it.
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-10-13 16:28
    "Shields down to 20 percent, captain."
    "Aft hull plating is gone!"
    "Arm photon torpedoes. Fire!!"

    All this to destroy one little Arduino Uno.

    -- Gordon
  • Capt. QuirkCapt. Quirk Posts: 872
    edited 2011-10-13 16:40
    Here is two quotes from two RC Groups Arduino users, and their opinion of a Propeller used for a bldc motor controller:
    Interesting chip! From Menlo park it might be aimed at physics detector processing to check the speed of light.
    But it is a case of horses for courses. There is not much scope, I don't think?, for parallel processing, or even digital signal
    processing, in a BLDC controller. Comparators, ADCs, timers, in threes for sinusoidal maybe. What do you mean by PID?
    Proportional, Integral and Derivative is what I would understand from chemical controllers.
    I don't think there is any use for a Propeller chip in a BLDC controller... or anywhere else really, but this is not a
    thread about that. Use chips which have dedicated hardware for motor control - SiLabs C8051F33x, Microchip PIC/DSPIC,
    ST's STM8L, ST's STM32, whatever you choose, but something that has proper peripherals.
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2011-10-13 17:08
    At the risk of being burned at the stake as a heritic. I kinda like the Arduino. I wish the Seeduino became the new standard because it has obvious improvements like a power switch and correctly spaced headers.

    This does not mean I dislike Parallax gear. Quite the contrary as I have much more Parallax stuff. But the Arduino is pretty capable too and the IDE is nice.
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2011-10-13 17:39
    Seems like all this dumping on the Arduino about has the same effect as banning a movie, video, or song has on their sales.
  • PJAllenPJAllen Banned Posts: 5,065
    edited 2011-10-13 17:43
    Dumping?
    What dumping?
    Who's dumping?

    Nobody's dumping on anything.
  • Dr_AculaDr_Acula Posts: 5,484
    edited 2011-10-13 17:49
    I agree with PJ Allen post #4. Get the Prop projects out there - in the print press, on hackaday, on instructables etc.
  • Capt. QuirkCapt. Quirk Posts: 872
    edited 2011-10-13 19:39
    Well I was dumping, or at least unhappy with the Arduino majority on RC Groups

    All I see when I look at Arduino's website is a Pbasic copy.:frown:

    On RC Groups, the scope of the group projects is immense! Perhaps
    a few Propeller group projects on boards like RC Groups would draw more
    attention.
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2011-10-13 19:49
    Sorry if I offended anyone by saying "dumping on the Arduino". Perhaps I should have said by "stating how much better" the Propeller was. I was responding to Martins comments.
    Martin_H wrote: »
    At the risk of being burned at the stake as a heritic. I kinda like the Arduino. I wish the Seeduino became the new standard because it has obvious improvements like a power switch and correctly spaced headers.

    This does not mean I dislike Parallax gear. Quite the contrary as I have much more Parallax stuff. But the Arduino is pretty capable too and the IDE is nice.

    I have to agree 100% with PJ Allens comments as well as those by Gordon McComb and Capt. Quirk. All the smack downs in the world will not do anywhere as much to raise the image of the Propeller as a few good projects using the propeller to the best of it`s potential.
  • Cluso99Cluso99 Posts: 18,069
    edited 2011-10-13 19:54
    The Arduino has so much traction, it is chosen for this reason. Sure the prop would be better in many projects, but they dont get a look in. Martin has helped get the prop out there. But as PJ Allen said, its all to do with the apps.
  • FranklinFranklin Posts: 4,747
    edited 2011-10-13 20:02
    One thing that puts Arduino out there are the shields. Want motor drivers? Pop on a shield. Sound files to play for a project? Pop on a shield. That's where it starts and once you have a chip you know how to use you stick with it. I'm suprised how many times an Arduino is put in a project when a bare Atmel 328 (or smaller) will do the job just fine.
  • Peter KG6LSEPeter KG6LSE Posts: 1,383
    edited 2011-10-13 23:20
    PJ Allen wrote: »
    I think the Atmel micros are somewhere between the Stamp's PIC and the Propeller, sort of like the SX.

    Well said !!
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-10-14 01:10
    The five stages of Arduino grief:
    1. Denial: "Eh. It's just a fad. It'll pass."

    2. Anger: "What?!! It's just a freaking AVR! The Prop is leagues ahead of that thing! Why is it getting so much press? A plague upon that publication! May ten thousand fleas infest its editorial staff!"

    3. Bargaining: "I promise to be nice to old people and bratty children, if the Arduino would just ... go away."

    4. Depression: "The Arduino will never go away. [sniff!] The world at large is doomed to single-process mediocrity!"

    5. Acceptance: "Meh. Who cares? Let them have their stupid Arduinos. I've got my Propeller!"

    Can't we all just skip to stage five? :)

    -Phil
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2011-10-14 02:58
    Why not take a good look at Gangster Gadget's product line. It seems to be one of the best modular approaches to boards for the Propeller. One might even say they offer 'shields' if one dares.

    About all that Parallax can really do is to provide a good modular Propeller platform for starters and the best they have come up with is the Propeller Proto Board - which isn't really optimal for the kind of stacking that Gangster Gadget has done better at.

    I suspect that the more fundamental problems are related to the kind of computer language that the NOOB thinks is easier to learn. OOP in any form is a bit daunting to many who don't know anything. The popularity of computer languages with Basic is their name remains in that there is a fear factor involved in learning to code. Maybe, SPIN just scares off the less ambitious.

    The world will always be divided into the micro-controllers that include hardware solutions for every option and devices that can do the same in software. Until the user begins to understand that the hardware solutions tend to create more problems and complexity than needed; that user will seek out PICs and AVRs as solutions rather than something as versatile as an SX or Propeller.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-10-14 04:15
    Loopy,

    Before you think I'm getting at you, I agree wholeheartedly with you about the Gadget Gangster Propeller boards, they are great. The Prop Proto board is good but it's not that "plug-n-play" thing the world seems to crave now a days.

    Now I do have a question re:
    The world will always be divided into the micro-controllers that include hardware solutions for every option and devices that can do the same in software.

    As far as I can tell the MCU world has never been divided that way, well, not until quite recently.
    Originally we had micro-processors, just a CPU like 8080, 6800, Z80 etc, you had to add memory chips and peripheral chips like UARTS, Timers, parallel I/O etc. if you need them.
    As time went by semiconductor processes shrank the circuitry and little by little those memory and peripheral functions got built into the same chip. Think 8051 for example.
    Now we have systems on a chip that pretty much include everything you need for many applications in a single device. Think PIC's AVR's and all those immensely complicated ARM chips that sit in mobile phone now a days.

    The complication there is of course that you have to pick your chip carefully for the application you have. You lose flexibility.

    As for the "...devices that can do the same in software" please give some examples. It was quite a rarity to bit bang a UART in software for example.

    Only in very recent times do we see the emergence of the Propeller, still a niche product in MCU world, that throws out dedicated peripherals and uses the silicon real estate for extra processors (COGs), holds up the idea of "software peripherals" and hence gives back the flexibility.

    The only other example I can think of that is generally available is the chip that shall remain nameless here (starts with X) which is also a recent development.
  • RossHRossH Posts: 5,519
    edited 2011-10-14 04:34
    Heater. wrote: »
    The only other example I can think of that is generally available is the chip that shall remain nameless here (starts with X) which is also a recent development.

    Just want to check something here - has anyone ever seen Leon and Heater in the same room?

    Ross.
  • jdoleckijdolecki Posts: 726
    edited 2011-10-14 04:40
    We should send LadyAda (Adafruit.com) some Propeller stuff to review.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-10-14 04:49
    Heater,

    There is also Chuck Moore's GreenArrays device (144 processors):

    http://www.greenarraychips.com/

    It has to be programmed in Forth, which is something of an acquired taste.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-10-14 06:27
    RossH,
    ...has anyone ever seen Leon and Heater in the same room?

    Not me. I'd love to meet Leon some day and his cat. Might not be much fun for anyone else in the room though.
  • Martin HodgeMartin Hodge Posts: 1,246
    edited 2011-10-14 06:35
    Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) wrote: »
    The five stages of Arduino grief:

    Stage 6. Try connecting the two worlds together!!

    (see link in sig!)
  • Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
    edited 2011-10-14 07:48
    PJ Allen wrote: »
    They do projects.
    Results matter.
    Stop grousing.
    Get your projects out there.

    Dead on!

    OBC
  • Kevin WoodKevin Wood Posts: 1,266
    edited 2011-10-14 09:03
    > Just want to check something here - has anyone ever seen Leon and Heater in the same room?

    You mean like how Bruce Wayne & Batman, or Clark Kent & Superman, are never seen together? :)
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2011-10-14 09:59
    Kevin Wood,
    I'm the one who wears his underwear under his trousers.:)

    Hmm... For those who speak American here that is "I'm the one who wears his pants under his pants". Just to avoid confusion.

    Leon, Help, they are getting at us.
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2011-10-14 10:04
    Heater. wrote: »
    Kevin Wood,
    I'm the one who wares his underware under his trousers.:)

    LOL!

    Wonder how us Americans ever came up with that concept?

    Getting totally off topic. Sorry.

    Jim
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 6,347
    edited 2011-10-14 12:54
    Heater. wrote: »
    Kevin Wood,
    Hmm... For those who speak American here that is "I'm the one who wares his pants under his pants". Just to avoid confusion.
    Actually we would use "wears" instead of "wares" and "underwear" instead of "underware". :) Either "trousers" or "pants" could be used, but "trousers" is probably more of an older generation term.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-10-14 13:07
    According to my Concise OED, "pants" in Britain refers only to undergarments, i.e. knickers. So, typically, one wears his pants under his trousers. If you're a superhero, you might wear your pants over your tights, but not over your slacks or trousers. That would just look weird.

    -Phil
  • Nick McClickNick McClick Posts: 1,003
    edited 2011-10-14 13:09
    jdolecki wrote: »
    We should send LadyAda (Adafruit.com) some Propeller stuff to review.
    Adafruit does sell the Propeller Platform USB & the ProtoPlus. I've also been writing posts for their blog (a few).

    But PJ et al. are right - projects are what really matters. There are more Arduino users, so there are more Arduino projects.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-10-14 13:25
    Ladies wear knickers over here. Male and female under-garments are often called pants, and underpants usually refers to mens' pants. Voluminous undergarments worn by elderly ladies are bloomers.
Sign In or Register to comment.