Arduino TRE to have 1 GHz TI Sitara AM335x
jmg
Posts: 15,173
In an interesting move, the Arduino originators have chosen a 1GHz Sitara AM335x processor for their next board.
http://arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardTre
http://www10.edacafe.com/nbc/articles/1/1224137/Texas-Instruments-Sitara-AM335x-ARM-Cortex-A8-processor-fuels-most-powerful-Arduino-date
connectivity options, including Ethernet, XBee wireless radios, USB and CAN.
The AM335x processor also includes two on-chip 200 MHz 32-bit Programmable Real-time Unit (PRU) microcontrollers, which can be used for innumerable real-time applications including motor control and pulse width modulation.
No prices yet, but this moves Arduino TRE into BeagleBone Black and RaspPi territory.
http://arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardTre
http://www10.edacafe.com/nbc/articles/1/1224137/Texas-Instruments-Sitara-AM335x-ARM-Cortex-A8-processor-fuels-most-powerful-Arduino-date
connectivity options, including Ethernet, XBee wireless radios, USB and CAN.
The AM335x processor also includes two on-chip 200 MHz 32-bit Programmable Real-time Unit (PRU) microcontrollers, which can be used for innumerable real-time applications including motor control and pulse width modulation.
No prices yet, but this moves Arduino TRE into BeagleBone Black and RaspPi territory.
Comments
Yes, it can be used for motor controllers... like a Lamborghini can help deliver papers on a newspaper route.
Except of course in my mind it had a Propeller or two on it.
ARM for the Linux heavy lifting, Prop for the real world interfaces.
Those artists will be programming the Linux side easily given enough Arduino style easy to use libraries and perhaps they will be working in Python or some such. Like the Raspberry Pi for kids idea.
If nothing else the Linux side allows you to run the Arduino IDE on your target machine itself.
No I idea what will come of those Real-Time units.
Unix/Linux had a completely different vision of what they provided to the computing world - a mult-user, networked enviroment with mass storage on-line. The whole goal was to develop a network of universities sharing their research over a vast network, not the robotic side of things.
I do find these teenie-tiny Linux systems very interesting as one might replace my rather large desktop one day, but they seem way out of bounds it terms of a focus on basic low-level computing. You have to contend with file systems, a GUI, and so on.
I try not to daunt beginners by giving them too much too soon. But that is what I feel these System of a Chip devices might do. It is about 10 years now and I am just getting comfortable with Linux.
Maybe 10 year olds in the USA and Europe are more savy than myself. I just have doubts that is so.
Of course they will sell... to at least the crowd that buys these boards and puts them in box in the closet after a few weeks of amusement. As for myself, I am still pulling boards out of the closet that I purchased 10 years ago and now am able to fully use.
I guess I should get a 250Gbyte SATA drive attached to my Cubieboard and really have it powered up and plugged into my wifi router. I just have so much overcapacity now that it doesn't seem necessary.
http://arduino.cc/en/ArduinoCertified/IntelGalileo
edit:
Found a bit more info on the Galileo. It runs "a small Linux" by default and can run a full version from an SD card. Price is supposedly under $60 US.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2052000/intel-outfits-opensource-galileo-computer-with-quark-chip-targets-diy-crowd.html
No you don't need all the facilities of a Unix like OS on a micro controller. However if a Beagle, or Pi or Tre can do the job you want done it can be very cool to have the entire development system available on your target robot or whatever gadget. If you need an MCU like the Prop for some tasks on said robot or gadget you can run the dev tools for that on there as well.
In your application code you don't have to contend with file systems, a GUI, and so on. Just write the code to do what you want, pin wiggling, serial,
networking, whatever. Of course if you want to use the thing to do code development on you need to know your way around a bit, like an computer.
Well then, meet Amy. http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/3506 a bit older than 10 but never mind. I'm sure if we could handle Philips Electronic Engineer kits aged 10 then things like the Pi are a doddle.
The Tre worries me as it seems to perpetuate that screwed up pin out the have for Arduino sheilds. Gak. I'm not sure why that ARM chip needs an AVR bolted on.
But with their numbers approaching 1 million units, it is here to stay. The real advantage to it is the wide range of shields that are available. Need an Ethernet, yep, motor bridge drivers, yep, wireless, yep...
Even Parallax noticed there was a market there and has shields for them. I tend to agree that Linux is not the best environment for embedded controller work, but you can't beat it if you need a user interface on a graphic screen or a network protocol stack.
The Arduino TRE and Gallieo will be powerful, but, only you can't build your own. So, if I want to make a product based on the components on the board I have to put the board in my product.
---
I wonder why Arduino has 2 boards however? They are kinda fragmenting their product lineup by having so many boards. Must be that the Arduino TRE will cost a lot, that's why they have the Gallieo.
I suspect the Uno will continue to be the most popular.
Really, these days, for a lot of ARMs you supply 3.3V and you are done. No boot flash or 1.8V supply like the Prop2 will need.
If you need Linux say for the GUI, file system or networking, pick up a Beagle Bone Black for $50 and you are done.
Yeah, I keep waiting to see if someone will put up some useful documentation on the PRU's in the BeagleBone Black. I have not found clear documentation on that yet and for some bizarre reason it seems TI is not lifting a finger to fill any gaps there. I'm currently hanging a Prop off a UART on the BBBlack and using it to control some sonar sensors and any other RT tasks I'm going to need but really that ought not be necessary with the PRU's if I just understood how to use them.
That was my hope as well for the Prop-2. I wanted to run more complex C++ programs and have enough compute power to do work with a raw IMU without needing to get heroic but I moved on to this path when it was clear the Prop-2 is a ways off still. The complexity involved in getting Linux setup just right for a bigger project is no joke. I'm right now documenting the steps I have to take to go from a base Arch Linux install to functionally ready to be used as a WiFi Robot and it is a good long list.
A bear bones ARM may run with little else supporting it and no OS but it'll be a long road from there to anything useful for casual builder.
But there are many environments where if all you need is to wiggle an IO, you can do that in a couple lines of code in a couple minutes. That includes Arduino, emBed, and various BASICs. And with the hardware cost for a board of less what a guess at a Prop2 chip will be. Small ARMs with multiple CPUs too at less than $10, or just stack up a couple $1 ARMs.
I am sorry... but I am exceedingly pleased with using pfth on the Propeller with an SDcard as a complete IDE, editor, and program storage system. And I can use a second Propeller as a dumb terminal to provide the user interface.
pfth even plays chess in Forth on one Propeller.
The whole SOC package of GUI, Ubuntu Linux, HDMI, and more has several drawbacks. Many more layers of distracting complexity, including a LAN interface. And it many ways it seems to be more of marketing ploy for one vendor to hitch their wagon on to another than has a lot of popular name recognition.. not so much an really organized curriculum for learners.
In this case it is Arduino + Intel + Ubuntu. I am wary. I recently discovered that Intel will no longer supply video drivers to any Linux other than Ubuntu. (see the Debian eeePC site and discussions about Cedar Trail.)
In sum, Forth on the Propeller can provide a complete development environment for the Propeller... Dave Hein has been quitely working on this for quite some time. And while a do love Linux for being open-source and very educational in that sense, it is a rather vast topic for 'learning the basics'. I fear in Linux that everything will just come with longer and longer preambles to getting anything done.
That 'rather cool' Linux system really can't handle PWM, PID, micro-stepping, or quadriture encoders........ it just sits in the background, like the relationship of a hood ornament to what's under the hood. Sure, one might learn Python, Perl, and Ruby, but what for?
It seems to go the long way around. a very long long way.
Because people like other languages. IIRC even you like Python.
What I don't like is trying to teach all and everything in one 12 week course ... just because everyone claims to have a better educational value.
I can't seem to find any real need to use Python with the Propeller.
Since I have been learning Forth on the Propeller, GForth on the PC makes more sense to me. I can open a serial port in Linux as an open-file and have immediate communications without shift over to a whole new topic.
http://www.embeddedartists.com/products/boards/lpc4088_qsb.php
or the lpc1114 in a 28 pin DIP package.
The ARM ecosystem now has such a variety options that one isn't really doesn't have to be wedded to a particular one anymore.
http://www.embeddedartists.com/products/boards/lpc4088_qsb.php
or the lpc1114 in a 28 pin DIP package.
The ARM ecosystem now has such a variety options that one isn't really doesn't have to be wedded to a particular one anymore.
Wow. In fact, that one sounds more real than TI's which is still some time off.
Look like Intel managed to move faster than TI
I guess they had something lying around, and this doubtless helps too :
[" In a video, Krzanich said a conversation just 60 days ago made him realize Intel needs to be part of the Arduino ecosystem. The company has plans for at least one or two more Arduino boards, he said."]
However, I cannot see any Video Display support on the intel unit ?
So they have released a flash new x86, that cannot directly run even TurboPascal ( or any of the shiploads of other PC development flows... ) ?
Perhaps their remote-debug support will be so polished, this does not matter ?
Still, it is a big step for intel to re-discover embedded low end, and we can look forward to their "at least one or two more Arduino boards".
Really? Intel seems to be a very big supporter of Linux in general.
Maybe you should let the people at Intel's Open Source Technology Center know about this.
https://01.org/projects/linux-kernel
https://01.org/linuxgraphics/about
"Intel is shipping out 50,000 Galileo boards for free to students at over 1,000 universities over the next 18 months."
and the software link on Ardunio says this
["Arduino IDE for Intel Galileo
This version of the Arduino IDE is based on the 1.5.3 but supports only the Intel Galileo board that has the x86 architecture. "]
but the link takes you straight to an intel website download. 104MB*
Seems intel has thrown some serious engineering at this, are are using Ardunio as a doorway.
* That 104MB unpacks to 378MB, 5151 files 788 folders
- but then presents a small 840k ardunio.exe to the user.
Compiling is not quick (but given the size, expected ) and blink example reports this
Binary sketch size: 49,082 bytes (of a 262,144 byte maximum) - 18% used
Wow, 5 lines of code, and it is 18% full ?!
a couple of Slightly larger example give
Binary sketch size: 51,211 bytes (of a 262,144 byte maximum) - 19% used
Binary sketch size: 54,331 bytes (of a 262,144 byte maximum) - 20% used
No simulator, and no listings - this really is dumbed-down.
I'm given no idea if that 'Binary sketch' is native x86, or some script / LMM.
The max does seem rather small ?
Still, it does look to give novices a deliberately simple, toe-wetting pathway.
I wonder what the serious students do, after the first lecture ?
Looks like the Galileo is rather limited if not ill thought out. Constipated I/O, no video and ability to develop software on it. Yeah it has a mini-PCI card slot but big deal. How many students can afford a PCI based prototype card? They could have put a ISA slot on it. build a bunch of cheap ISA protoboards(I cannot believe the prices vendors are charging today for ISA boards, it's a ripoff) and let them have at it.
The sketches seem to be rather bloated - I still remember compiling code for hardware with Turbo Pascal and C decades back, the binaries were tiny compared to what JMG posted.
Also looks like the software can only access the on-chip SRAM (512k) and not the 256MB DRAM.
So we look with interest at what pass 2 brings.
That "rather cool" Linux system may not do PWM and such. Although some can. That's not what it is for. I did say "if a Beagle, or Pi or Tre can do the job...". At some point my code can be big enough that it won't fit in an MCU. Or I will want, ethernet, wifi, USB...And so on. A small Linux board can be a sloution. Horses for courses. When you need real time bit twiddling use an MCU.
Can't speak for Perl or Ruby, which seem kind of pointless and brain damaged to me, but Python is a wonderful thing. Simple and powerful. In Python I can do this: and get this:
Try doing that in Forth:)
Python has all that interactivity that Forth heads harp on about.
Can only wiggle it's GPIO pins at 250 Hz.
Has no video output.
Perpetuates the broken Arduino header layout.
Seems like a fail to me.
My main point is that the educational claims of a Raspberry Pi, et al. are about the same of those of Apple and MS since the beginning of all thiis some 35 years ago. The testimonial of one 13 year old is not representational of what is and can be done in a class room.
The choice between TV video display (did schools ever have one TV per child) or HDMI (which schools can't afford to buy in quantify) is rather absurd. The Propeller does quite well with TV and VGA... resources the schools might have on hand.
It has been said here that 'Friends don't ask friends to cross-compile'. The implication is that use and learning of computers bogs down heavily in managing the tool-chain of cross-compiles. I'd rather NOT waste time with this if I have classes to teach.
The Propeller with Forth can provide a very rich educational environment to learn Spin, PASM, and Forth at the same time; and it can extend into programing a PC in GForth in a text-based mode. The Raspberry Pi, et. al. are essentially GUI interfaces that require the learner to deal with yet another layer of interface to get results. Text-base programming education keeps the focus on the code realities, while GUI tends to just add a lot more permutations and distraction.
LAN, wifi, USB.... There is a time to teach these. But I feel strongly that teaching the basics first will empower students to handle all these and many other protocols with ease.
Okay, Python can multiply larger numbers that have very little utility in the real world... wonderful.
On the other hand, Forth on a Propeller will eventually make clear to you that everything is really a 32bit binary and there is more to learn. First of all is that signed 32bit is quite different that unsigned.
++++++++++++++++++
Years ago, I had a girl friend in San Francisco that worked in the USA's leading advertising research firm. 99% of their research was on targeting children. Why? They don't make economic decisions. They don't consider the merits of what they buy now in terms of what they will have in the future.
Education can easily be abused as a marketing exploit that never delivers. Consider the widely accepted Lego. Where is the educational content? If Lego was really educating about construction and engineering, it would have much more that mere bricks. Where are the various arches? Where are the trusses? Where are the columns? and the beams?
"Rather cool" is pandering to the naive. 32bits is a realistic limitation that is quite adequate for achieving something useful with programing... we seem to need onlly 24 bits to represent adequate visual color. Music can be adequately written within 4 or 5 octaves. Even the representation of Chinese onlly requires 12,000 or so characters.
The point is there are real lessons presented in an informative and useful manner, and then there is the ledgerdomain of the internet that claims any new product will morph your child into a future Fermi or Einstein.
In sum, if the Arduino Tre, or the Raspberry Pi, or the Beagle Bone is really easy to employ in a classroom setting. If it doesn't undluly take the school's budge by forcing up-grades to expensive monitors. And it it can stay on a well-written cource sylabus and lesson plays... it will do well of its own accord.
But gifts to schools are rather dubious. Early on, Apple gifted 1000 Apple ][e computers to the Catholic schools in San Francisco and they seemed to have all ended up being liquidated brand new by one discount electtronics store in Daly City. I suspect that the Catholic church had a discussion with an electrician on how much they would have to pay to bring in 1000 watts of electricty to each students desk and called it quits.
At least the Raspberry Pi is lower power,,,, but have you every really looked at how many Mains outlets there are in the normal classroom? Evern 350 watts to each student is a costly project. At least wit iPads, they can be charged elsewhere and cordless.
That does seem like a serious shortcoming. What were they thinking?
The oddball pin spacing is required for shield compatibility isn't it? I don't know, the only thing I ever did with my Arduino was blink the on board LED a bit. That was a year or so ago, put it back in the box after that and haven't messed with it since.
Oh goody, lot's of things to correct and disagree with:) The educational claims of a Raspberry Pi are about as far removed from those of Apple and MS as I can imagine. The Pi Foundation is not dumping computers into schools to hook kids onto their products. The Pi Foundation is selling those boards, at allmost no profit, to kids to play on at home. The Pi is not pushed as an all singing all dancing educational tool and replacement for books etc, It has a very specific aim in mind, to attract the curious into
programming.
Back in the day a kid would get a Sinclair Spectrum, C64, etc, plug it into a TV and turn it on. Immediately he would be confronted by a command prompt and pretty much the only way proceed was to start to program: After exploring some games and finding the limits of BASIC many kids were moving on to assembler.
That is what the Raspi is trying to create as a counterbalance to the majority of the worlds unprogrammable games machines or hard to program computers and phones and tabs etc. And I think it is doing quite well at that.
You may say the lack of VGA output is a negative point, but for the target demographic, British teenagers, most of them have tellies and screens in their bedrooms already. The Pi is intended primarily for kids dens not schools. Who said anything about a GUI on the Pi? Turn it on and their is your command prompt. If you have no screen access it via SSH over the net. Quite so. And no user needs to cross compile anything for the PI. The Pi can compile everything for itself. Besides did you ever consider that the Prop Tool or propgcc is a cross-compiler? Yes there is. But having them there to use out of the box is very convenient wouldn't you say? That was just one example I pulled out of the air. There are so many things offered by a language like Python and it's run time that I was surprised you could write them off with "why bother?"
I do agree that familiarity with binary, and logic, and machine operation and hence assembler is something anyone who programs should have. Many though would say that it's not the best place to start. Those would be the guys like us who were first attracted by the simplicity of tha BASIC program above. I do all the time and what?
Lego is many peoples all time favourite toy, especially for those of us who grew up with it in the days when there pretty much were only bricks. When you graduated from Lego, aged 4 or something, then there was Meccano where you could get into some serious engineering. Never seen that claim made by the Raspberry Pi Foundation of the Arduino guys.
That sounds more like MS and Apple. Again the Pi is intended to be taken home and abused. If they get into class rooms around the world that is a bonus.
Interesting... some things never change.
When I took Fortran on an IBM 36O, the university's computer courses had one very rigid rule... " No playing computer games " (It seems the game players learned games, not computers.)
And of course, there is the other insight.... a class needs a syllabus, lesson plans, and a teacher that knows both the subject and the materials. Oh, and a complete set of resources for each student (a computer with complet i/o in this case; networks optional).
Is Intel going to provide 50,000 HDMI monitors, keyboards, and wiring of classrooms? I suspect not. If these items are needed to be fully deployed, everything needs to be considered.
@Heater
In regards to the Raspberry Pi...
Okay, maybe not the same as Apple and MS, but a bit naive.
New teachers do the same thing as the Raspberry Pi Foundation... offer more to the students than they can handle, tend to be overly idealistic, expect expensive resources to appear out of thin air, and have very compelling ideals.
There are signicant pragmatics involved in getting the best results from the majority of students in a class. One cannot just toss a book at a youth and hope they will read and assimilate with comprehension.
I wasn't aware that the Raspberry Pi was running at the command prompt without the GUI. My Cubieboard runs a full GUI of Android and Ubuntu Linux.