Each time I find myself in a room with either young people or adults that are new to microcontrollers (which is often), the only thing I hear is Arduino this and Arduino that*. They talk about how great it is, how easy it is to use and how overpowered it is. They will politely listen when I tell them about the Propeller chip but all they want to do is use an Arduino.
They hear and read about the Arduino all the time, it's what they want.
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.
Honestly the shields are what made me not want to try the arduino and why I choose to use the propeller. When I think of microcontrollers I think of both electronics and programming. I feel like shields take away the electronics part of microcontrollers and it just focuses on programming; however, theres nothing wrong with that, but you mine as well just program on a computer. Shields dont teach you electronics unless there is no shield that meets your requirements, then you are back to square one and have to learn electronics. I dont want sound like I am bashing shields or the arduino thats just how I feel.
> I feel like shields take away the electronics part of microcontrollers and it just focuses on programming; however, theres nothing wrong with that, but you mine as well just program on a computer.
Not everybody wants to learn about electronics just to be able to use an electronics device. Just like not everybody wants to rebuild car engines just to drive one. Besides, shields are no different than the modules that Parallax sells - RFID, motor controller, Spinneret, etc. - except that the shields adhere to a certain common design to make interfacing easier. The overall design has enough merit that people have duplicated it with the Propeller - Propeller Platform. GadgetGangster, Propeller ASC.
JFC - nobody's bashed the arduino, so stop defending and interpreting and representing already.
I agree. It's whatever makes you happy. If the Arduino foats your boat that is fine. But, the Propeller and Basic Stamp has been foating my boat for years.
It may not be bit banging or software peripherals as done on the prop but some of the early 8 bitters were bit banging serial data and byte banging parallel data to provide I/O functions. There was a video terminal (24 lines x 80 characters) that produced video by by executing a string of instructions for each scan line as well as H sync, and V sync. It scanned the keyboard and updated video memory during the sync period. My first floppy controller (8080/S100 system) also byte banged data in/out using the cpu wait signal.
@all
To me it looks like the hobby marketplace is split into several areas.
1 - Those who want to learn both electronics and programming.
2 - Those who are interested in either programming or electronics, but not both.
3 - Those who want to build a specific project using the simplest possible building blocks.
It seems group 3 and some of group 2 are attracted to the Arduino, while the Propeller gets most of it's users from group 1 and a few from 2 and 3. To attract more people from group 2 and 3 we need to provide both hardware and software building blocks.
Dave Hein,
"ware", "wear", you have just noticed that I can't spell. Especially when tapping on a phones touch screen whilst riding on crowded bus.
"Trousers" it is for me, what with being so old, but I often use the slang "trews".
In my way of thinking, the Arduino is taking off for a similar reason the basic stamp took off. They are tapping a certain market that the stock propeller won't be able to fill, unfortunately. To the uninitiated, C probably isn't much harder to learn than basic.
The Propeller and the arduino world really aren't mutually exclusive. GCC C++ will be available for the Prop in the near future. Combine that with an arduino programming front end and the Propeller ASC, and the propduino becomes a reality.
C++ is also not a beginners language, the Arduino/Wiring developers were smart enough to keep that part of the development system away from users.
It would be interesting to see someone do a port of Wiring(which is what the Arduino s/w is based on) for the Prop, it would make a Prop variant of the Arduino a reality and a nice selling point.
When I suggested C++ it was in the context of how it's used in the arduino. The arduino uses just enough of C++ to provide an object abstraction. In this sense, it actually makes it easier for for beginners to learn than C. The Spin language uses a very similar approach.
With the appropriate libraries, drivers and hardware, audiono code could be ported directly to the Prop with almost no changes.
C++ is also not a beginners language, the Arduino/Wiring developers were smart enough to keep that part of the development system away from users.
Arduino/Wiring is just a wrapper for a simple version of C++.
C++ is how you get object.method with C and it mostly serves the same function as SPIN objects. Nobody needs C++ multiple inheritance, object instantiation, cin/cout, or virtual polymorphism on a microcontroller.
It would be interesting to see someone do a port of Wiring(which is what the Arduino s/w is based on) for the Prop, it would make a Prop variant of the Arduino a reality and a nice selling point.
While this was not the original intent of the Propeller GCC project, it does make it possible because Propeller GCC can compile C++ programs. This is just one of many things that Propeller GCC enables.
AFAIK no one is promoting C++ as a good fit for small embedded controllers. Maybe it's a good fit for the Prop I and II. But know one will know until C++ has been ported and substantial apps written.
With the Arduino the average coder doesn't need to know C++ which is what makes Arduino so attractive for the non-techies. They don't need to know any of the stuff you wrote about C++ or the internals of the development suite to be productive.
Think of the Arduino as the next generation BasicStamp.
I looked up Arduino on Wikipedia. It seems they have a number of different microcontrollers, so the 'standard' is probably more the universal code and the layout of the headers.
I wonder if one could add the Propeller to the list of supported microcontrollers?
The code is very similar to C code that is already working. The hardware has been done with Propduino.
In terms of raw specifications, the propeller has more memory and more flexibility to add peripherals. Maybe we are not selling it the right way?
How about a Propduino that adds a few peripherals, like a micro SD card, mouse and keyboard, and, if you like, some external memory.
What would it take to make it compatible with C89? Maybe where the Arduino uses "digitalwrite' to change a pin, on the Prop that calls a function and inside that function digitalwrite() we add the specific C89 code to change a Propeller pin.
Libraries to drive the peripherals above already exist in C89. So the biggest barriers might be to write a few functions so Arduino code can run without (much) modification, and the design of a board that does more than any existing Arduino board.
Why can't the Propeller become the new Arduino motherboard?
I can't see a Propeller-based Arduino being competitive on price, and it won't have anything like the performance offered by the 32-bit Arduino boards, which are about the same price as the AVR-based ones. Apart from VGA and TV output, which probably won't be of much interest to users, why should a typical Arduino user buy it?
@dr_acula: Very good point. I wonder if the Propeller GCC will add in support for Arduino sketches. Granted, running Arduino designed sketches would be a waste of the propeller's horsepower, but it would create a better bridge between Arduino users looking for something more and the propeller.
@Leon: I would have to disagree. With Martin's Propeller ASC only $5 more than the typical Arduino UNO, you do have straightforward price competition. For someone wanting video out, an extra $5 and three resistors makes it a done deal. Also, for people not using the analog inputs, the Propeller Proto Board is an equivalent product at the same price. (or even less if you go with the non-USB version)
@kwinn:
3 - Those who want to build a specific project using the simplest possible building blocks.
I also agree that this is what attracts people to the Arduino. Through several methods of publicity, "non-programmers" know that they can buy a $30 board, spent a short amount of time copying some code posted somewhere, and add some pizzazz to some project they are doing. I have yet to see an Arduino project that I myself couldn't do with the propeller.
As much as I don't care for the Arduino itself, it's popularity is not solely based on it's design. As others have said, it is based on publicity of projects that can be duplicated by people who are new to electronics. The DIY, hacker, and electronics hobbyist communities are growing at phenomenal rates, and in many cases, the new folks are looking for easy/quick solutions more than getting the job done in the best available tools.
This is why I have been working on a Propeller based GPS project that can be made by making a single trip to Radio Shack in the near future. If people like the project and know they can stop in at a single store to grab everything they need to make it, they are more apt to do it. And, hopefully they will learn enough about the Propeller along the way to keep using it for other projects.
I can't see a Propeller-based Arduino being competitive on price, and it won't have anything like the performance offered by the 32-bit Arduino boards, which are about the same price as the AVR-based ones. Apart from VGA and TV output, which probably won't be of much interest to users, why should a typical Arduino user buy it?
Much as I hate to admit it, Leon is quite correct
It is madness for the Propeller to be sold as an Arduino competitor. It loses out on almost every aspect important to Arduino users - i.e. price and performance, compatibility and support.
Most Arduino users couldn't care less about 32 general purpose I/O pins (they don't need them) or fantastic timer functionality (they wouldn't know what to do with them), or strict determinism (huh?), or multiple cogs (Wow, cool - what are they for?), or any of the other thing we get all excited about with the Propeller. Naturally not, since their existing software won't be able to take advantage of them. They certainly won't be interested (or possibly even know what you are talking about) if you mentioned GCC or C++ - as far as they're concerned they use the "Arduino Programming Language" which is based on "sketches" and "wiring".
Finally, many of them probably don't actually write much code - they mainly just stitch together "sketches" written by others. The first question they are likely to ask is "can I still use the Arduino IDE and all the existing Arduino software?". When they find out the answer to both is "no", they will go elsewhere.
Arduino reached that SE Asian shores way too fast than Propeller. I know, the Props had been there in my country, but no one that I know actually bothers about them, despite how much I say that it is a pretty quick and nifty stuff. The local electronic component stores stock the Arduinos because they heard of them first. As far as I know, no one heard about "Propeller" or "Basic Stamp" in here. That made Arduino walked into the stores ... casually.
I'm not taking any sides, as I know both of Arduinos and Props are really good stuff. If I ever, ever want to teach my brother to work on some sensors for his Biosensors lectures (yeah, probably he would be lecturing that subject), I would have taught him Arduino because it is the stuff that is pretty accessible in local stores. In fact, I have the Props, they are good, but I kinda reserve them for more bigger projects. Of course, it doesn't make sense to use all 8-cores inside a simple sensing equipment, right?
These Arduino clones and shields are getting cheap. However, I do not care about the shields as I mainly do the wiring and stripboarding myself. The 32-bit Arduino clones such as Uno32 and the Pinguino-32 are really fast and good, only shy of those easy libraries for the begineers.
Software can go modular too. The Stamp's "What's a Micro" is what the Propeller will have in the future. This will open up the ease of creating more projects. The OBEX is a stepping stone. If we wrote prop apps and submitted to the magazines it would absolutely blow away anyone realizing the power of eight processors (at a dollar each) in one highly innovative chip. How many people know how to use the full power of their propeller chip with all eight cores?
AFAIK no one is promoting C++ as a good fit for small embedded controllers. Maybe it's a good fit for the Prop I and II. But know one will know until C++ has been ported and substantial apps written.
With the Arduino the average coder doesn't need to know C++ ...
As I said, "Arduino/Wiring is just a wrapper for a simple version of C++."
To clarify, It's just the good parts.
This rather reminds me of the old micro comparison charts long time ago. The manufacturer would show tables of tests which indicated that their micro did better than the competition. So after looking at "Why the 6502 is better than the 6805" and "Why the 6805 is better than the 6502" a semi-intelligent engineer would realize that the micros had different capabilities. Then marketing would come along and insist that the $0.99 COP-8 chip be used!
I can see that these blokes would prefer an arduino product over a Stamp.
Do the arduino-based products have SLEEP / NAP equivalents or just bigger battery budgets?
Howbeit, they're "single-thread" devices.
The Parallax Propeller -- It's 8 Microcontrollers in 1 (because life's too short for interrupts.)
Comments
They hear and read about the Arduino all the time, it's what they want.
*Not to be taken literally - but nearly so.
Honestly the shields are what made me not want to try the arduino and why I choose to use the propeller. When I think of microcontrollers I think of both electronics and programming. I feel like shields take away the electronics part of microcontrollers and it just focuses on programming; however, theres nothing wrong with that, but you mine as well just program on a computer. Shields dont teach you electronics unless there is no shield that meets your requirements, then you are back to square one and have to learn electronics. I dont want sound like I am bashing shields or the arduino thats just how I feel.
She already has.
Not everybody wants to learn about electronics just to be able to use an electronics device. Just like not everybody wants to rebuild car engines just to drive one. Besides, shields are no different than the modules that Parallax sells - RFID, motor controller, Spinneret, etc. - except that the shields adhere to a certain common design to make interfacing easier. The overall design has enough merit that people have duplicated it with the Propeller - Propeller Platform. GadgetGangster, Propeller ASC.
It may not be bit banging or software peripherals as done on the prop but some of the early 8 bitters were bit banging serial data and byte banging parallel data to provide I/O functions. There was a video terminal (24 lines x 80 characters) that produced video by by executing a string of instructions for each scan line as well as H sync, and V sync. It scanned the keyboard and updated video memory during the sync period. My first floppy controller (8080/S100 system) also byte banged data in/out using the cpu wait signal.
@all
To me it looks like the hobby marketplace is split into several areas.
1 - Those who want to learn both electronics and programming.
2 - Those who are interested in either programming or electronics, but not both.
3 - Those who want to build a specific project using the simplest possible building blocks.
It seems group 3 and some of group 2 are attracted to the Arduino, while the Propeller gets most of it's users from group 1 and a few from 2 and 3. To attract more people from group 2 and 3 we need to provide both hardware and software building blocks.
"ware", "wear", you have just noticed that I can't spell. Especially when tapping on a phones touch screen whilst riding on crowded bus.
"Trousers" it is for me, what with being so old, but I often use the slang "trews".
The breast-beating, hand-wringing, and this Catechism of Capitulation and Convergence irritate me to no end.
C++ is also not a beginners language, the Arduino/Wiring developers were smart enough to keep that part of the development system away from users.
It would be interesting to see someone do a port of Wiring(which is what the Arduino s/w is based on) for the Prop, it would make a Prop variant of the Arduino a reality and a nice selling point.
Why not?
With the appropriate libraries, drivers and hardware, audiono code could be ported directly to the Prop with almost no changes.
C++ is how you get object.method with C and it mostly serves the same function as SPIN objects. Nobody needs C++ multiple inheritance, object instantiation, cin/cout, or virtual polymorphism on a microcontroller.
While this was not the original intent of the Propeller GCC project, it does make it possible because Propeller GCC can compile C++ programs. This is just one of many things that Propeller GCC enables.
AFAIK no one is promoting C++ as a good fit for small embedded controllers. Maybe it's a good fit for the Prop I and II. But know one will know until C++ has been ported and substantial apps written.
With the Arduino the average coder doesn't need to know C++ which is what makes Arduino so attractive for the non-techies. They don't need to know any of the stuff you wrote about C++ or the internals of the development suite to be productive.
Think of the Arduino as the next generation BasicStamp.
I looked up Arduino on Wikipedia. It seems they have a number of different microcontrollers, so the 'standard' is probably more the universal code and the layout of the headers.
I wonder if one could add the Propeller to the list of supported microcontrollers?
The code is very similar to C code that is already working. The hardware has been done with Propduino.
In terms of raw specifications, the propeller has more memory and more flexibility to add peripherals. Maybe we are not selling it the right way?
How about a Propduino that adds a few peripherals, like a micro SD card, mouse and keyboard, and, if you like, some external memory.
What would it take to make it compatible with C89? Maybe where the Arduino uses "digitalwrite' to change a pin, on the Prop that calls a function and inside that function digitalwrite() we add the specific C89 code to change a Propeller pin.
Libraries to drive the peripherals above already exist in C89. So the biggest barriers might be to write a few functions so Arduino code can run without (much) modification, and the design of a board that does more than any existing Arduino board.
Why can't the Propeller become the new Arduino motherboard?
@Leon: I would have to disagree. With Martin's Propeller ASC only $5 more than the typical Arduino UNO, you do have straightforward price competition. For someone wanting video out, an extra $5 and three resistors makes it a done deal. Also, for people not using the analog inputs, the Propeller Proto Board is an equivalent product at the same price. (or even less if you go with the non-USB version)
@kwinn: I also agree that this is what attracts people to the Arduino. Through several methods of publicity, "non-programmers" know that they can buy a $30 board, spent a short amount of time copying some code posted somewhere, and add some pizzazz to some project they are doing. I have yet to see an Arduino project that I myself couldn't do with the propeller.
As much as I don't care for the Arduino itself, it's popularity is not solely based on it's design. As others have said, it is based on publicity of projects that can be duplicated by people who are new to electronics. The DIY, hacker, and electronics hobbyist communities are growing at phenomenal rates, and in many cases, the new folks are looking for easy/quick solutions more than getting the job done in the best available tools.
This is why I have been working on a Propeller based GPS project that can be made by making a single trip to Radio Shack in the near future. If people like the project and know they can stop in at a single store to grab everything they need to make it, they are more apt to do it. And, hopefully they will learn enough about the Propeller along the way to keep using it for other projects.
Much as I hate to admit it, Leon is quite correct
It is madness for the Propeller to be sold as an Arduino competitor. It loses out on almost every aspect important to Arduino users - i.e. price and performance, compatibility and support.
Most Arduino users couldn't care less about 32 general purpose I/O pins (they don't need them) or fantastic timer functionality (they wouldn't know what to do with them), or strict determinism (huh?), or multiple cogs (Wow, cool - what are they for?), or any of the other thing we get all excited about with the Propeller. Naturally not, since their existing software won't be able to take advantage of them. They certainly won't be interested (or possibly even know what you are talking about) if you mentioned GCC or C++ - as far as they're concerned they use the "Arduino Programming Language" which is based on "sketches" and "wiring".
Finally, many of them probably don't actually write much code - they mainly just stitch together "sketches" written by others. The first question they are likely to ask is "can I still use the Arduino IDE and all the existing Arduino software?". When they find out the answer to both is "no", they will go elsewhere.
Ross.
Arduino reached that SE Asian shores way too fast than Propeller. I know, the Props had been there in my country, but no one that I know actually bothers about them, despite how much I say that it is a pretty quick and nifty stuff. The local electronic component stores stock the Arduinos because they heard of them first. As far as I know, no one heard about "Propeller" or "Basic Stamp" in here. That made Arduino walked into the stores ... casually.
I'm not taking any sides, as I know both of Arduinos and Props are really good stuff. If I ever, ever want to teach my brother to work on some sensors for his Biosensors lectures (yeah, probably he would be lecturing that subject), I would have taught him Arduino because it is the stuff that is pretty accessible in local stores. In fact, I have the Props, they are good, but I kinda reserve them for more bigger projects. Of course, it doesn't make sense to use all 8-cores inside a simple sensing equipment, right?
These Arduino clones and shields are getting cheap. However, I do not care about the shields as I mainly do the wiring and stripboarding myself. The 32-bit Arduino clones such as Uno32 and the Pinguino-32 are really fast and good, only shy of those easy libraries for the begineers.
For other libraries not in the IDE, they must be ported first.
As I said, "Arduino/Wiring is just a wrapper for a simple version of C++."
To clarify, It's just the good parts.
--Rich
Do the arduino-based products have SLEEP / NAP equivalents or just bigger battery budgets?
Howbeit, they're "single-thread" devices.
The Parallax Propeller -- It's 8 Microcontrollers in 1 (because life's too short for interrupts.)
Ooohhhhh good one, there may be a job for you in Parallax marketing!
At a minimum you could have shirts printed for the expo events.
C.W.