Why isn't SimpleIDE promoted for Spin programming on the Propeller pages?
Heater.
Posts: 21,230
Why isn't SimpleIDE promoted for Spin programming on the Propeller pages?
A new forum member and Mac user was having trouble using BST. I suggested using SimpleIDE.
Turns out that SimpleIDE is not pushed at all as a Spin programming solution for the Propeller when you visit the Propeller pages.
Given the huge number of Mac users and the fact that SimpleIDE "just works" I wonder why it does not get more promotion.
A new forum member and Mac user was having trouble using BST. I suggested using SimpleIDE.
Turns out that SimpleIDE is not pushed at all as a Spin programming solution for the Propeller when you visit the Propeller pages.
Given the huge number of Mac users and the fact that SimpleIDE "just works" I wonder why it does not get more promotion.
Comments
Genuine question:
Not Spinny in what way?
Ray
I think my point is that as a potential new user of the Propeller you probably go and hit the Propeller pages on parallax.com.
"Great" you think, "I want to try that". "How do I program it?"
Ah, there are no tools for Mac and Linux users, unless they want to use C, sorry.
Now, we can debate how easy or not SimpleIDE is compared to whatever else but any tool is better than none, right?
Like Heater said, it's better for a new user to be able to try SimpleIDE on their Mac then walk away for lack of tool information.
Imagine wanting to program in the chip's mother tongue!
-Phil
Given the huge amout of time and effort that has gone into creating SimpleIDE and openspin and the fact they work so well, I'm surprised they don't get top billing alongside the legacy Windows support in the Prop Tool.
The first definition Google presented said specifically Canada.
oxforddictionaries.com says it's from Canada.
webster has it as "A small thicket or grove with undergrowth; a clump of trees." or "Thin and long; slim; slender." which
sounds more like it would come from South West England.
Seems to come from the French "espinei", for "thicket".
Ah well.
Think of it as a somewhat "civilized slang" interpreter (not exactly a ghetto dictionary).
There are many that feel that C and the SimpleIDE are not as simple as the Prop Tool and Spin. Especially for rank beginners to the world of programming and/or MCUs. Never mind the parallel nature of the Propeller.
"SimpleIDE" is something of a misnomer compared to the Arduino IDE. I'm not sure if that is due to SimpleIDE feature creep or just in the nature of the Propeller or the nature of C on the Propeller or what.
But if one guy "Mr T" in this case can post that "spinny" originates form wherever without any supporting evidence, quotes or whatever, then anything could mean anything and we are none the wiser. I think I'll start adding some definitions to words of my own just for fun:)
-Phil
I'm guessing a large majority of them are programming, and would prefer to program in, anything but C. Python is a big thing in that world. And hey look, Spin looks a bit like Python and is as easy to use.
Seems to me that Spin would get a much better reception in that world.
Anyway it looks like it's down to forumistas, like Bill Henning, to push the Propeller into that direction, a potential market that Parallax has ignored so far.
The Arduino IDE is world class. It probably has more users than all those hundreds of different semiconductor manufacturers IDEs put together.
I'm sure you are not saying that GCC isn't world class.
SimpleIDE is here. It exists. It works, for both C and Spin. On Macs, and Linux, and legacy Windows. Make use of it already.
SimpleIDE and OpenSpin are open sourced, written in languages that are easier to develop and maintain and where there is a much larger pool of potential programmers. In simple mode with Spin, once you are told about the project concept, it seems no more difficult than PropellerTool. PLUS (and this is becoming more and more important) it is a cross platform tool!
Whatever development and support budget there is for PropTool (I would guess none) would be better directed toward SimpleIDE and OpenSpin at this point.
If a new customer comes to the door and wants to program a Propeller, I don't think now is the time to toss them PropellerTool and say oh, by the way, we have nothing for your Linux or Mac users. But this tool is very "spinny" and you won't have to read a 2 minutes about project files....and when and if you do want to program in C/C++, you can start learning a NEW IDE.
People that want to continue or start using PropellerTool are more than welcome but it will continue to be updated and have features added in the future as much as it has in the past.
Project / no project is fine. Frankly, managing trees of files manually is easier the Prop Tool way. One can save off a version, then build from RAM while making changes, saving off the good, reverting to start on bad, etc... quick and easy. Compile from saved file requires a different workflow, a little longer, no worries otherwise. I like rapid builds from RAM when I'm learning. I like build from disk better when building.
Last time I used SimpleIDE, I did not see the editing features, but I liked everything else.
Setting aside professional users, they know how to take care of themselves. Hobbyists/casual users/beginners will make exactly that comparison. Walk into the store, look around, "that's interesting, oh dear can't play I don't use legacy Windows, better get an Arduino". Another customer lost. As I understand it the Propeller ecosystem, OBEX, was developed over many years by lots of volunteers. Not to mention the development of openspin and SimpleIDE. Who cares about Atmel?
What we care about is getting Propellers and Prop boards into the hands of customers. They don't see ATMEL, they see a choice: Arduino or Raspberry Pi or Propeller (If they ever happen to be lucky enough to stumble across the Propeller.
An example: Here is a presentation given at a JavaScript developer conference, of all places, to hundreds of people last year entitled "Hardware is Stupid Simple" by Sara Chipps (Yes really). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3zXlPkzhgw
Guess what? She is using a Mac, as most young dudes at such conferences seem to, and an Arduino. Why is that?
All it takes is some links on the Propeller product page next to the Propeller Tool, "Mac and Linux users step this way...". In fact every place the Propeller Tool is mentioned there should be that direction given.
Again, I don't speak for Parallax. This is just my personal opinion.
I get this discussion all the time when dealing with CAD software users, either in a pre-sales mode where we want them to buy our solution, or in user mode where they have it, but they are needy in some way.
Recently, a UI change to the Microsoft Ribbon paradigm has caused a small uprising. So far, it's a few alphas here and there generally annoyed at losing a lot of flexibility in the UI, which they have customized of course.
Root cause: "Let's make it touch friendly" which broke a lot of very useful options, leaving them ****** off and feeling like they got a downgrade.
Now, there is a "classic mode" for this release, to which they all moved and appear happy but worried. How long is this mode there. (One more release, but they don't really know that yet)
In the past, I've addressed this with lots of informational things necessary to sell the new paradigm. In some cases, like the users with a few displays, it's gonna be a tough sell this time as the Ribbon Bar thing really does not offer an optimal use profile. Not looking forward to that one. In most other cases, there are just new choices and sorting through those will yield a nice, efficient, comfy workflow.
To get there, I myself a long time classic mode user am going to have to use this farking Ribbon Bar thing and figure out how to make it sing. Not looking forward to that either. But once it's done, the users will see that, see my position and start digging in. There will be some hold outs, and those people and how vocal they are will likely determine the future of classic mode.
The parallels here are obvious. Prop Tool vs Simple IDE.
If we want people really exploring and getting comfortable with SimpleIDE, then we need to be leading by example. If we can't lead by example, there is some selling to do in our alpha community members. If the selling can't get done, features are needed.
Hard truths there guys. I don't like 'em, but I have been down this road many, many times. People work how they work. Sorry.
Guess what? I've got a nice, spiffy Mac that I really want to explore using as well as I do a Windows 7 / XP machine. Right now, given I'm using SPIN, Prop Tool is just so damn sweet it's not even funny. At the time it was made, the goal was to drop people right in and have them do stuff with as little in the way as possible and that goal was realized very well.
When I am on the Mac, I find using Prop Tool a bit less optimal, because I have to manage a virtual machine, and little things like executable conversion tools being windows executables just gets in the way. I can just put the whole Windows environment in a window, or full screen it and get the optimal workflow, but then I don't get all the spiffy Mac things I like in Mac OS. Sucks really.
If SimpleIDE is going to do SPIN, and it's the go forward tool, and it's cross platform (all of which I understand to be true), then I will be using it on Mac for P2 once that work gets done. Right now, it's early for that, so Windows it is for the moment.
This also means I'll have one workflow for C too, which is a real benefit.
Which leaves editor features. Are those really hard? Did Parallax get the benefit of some really great Delphi tool kit for those? Editor features are very important to me, important enough I'm also thinking once the core tools are all cross-platform, I can just move to Sublime, pay up on that one, and integrate it all there and get even more spiffy editor features!
Which would leave SimpleIDE out of my primary workflow. I'm not asking that SimpleIDE compete with Sublime. Not gonna happen. I know that. But it could potentially pick up the editor features in Prop Tool. You guys tell me.
I could also setup Sublime for my own things, and when sharing here, use SimpleIDE too. This depends on how all the tools end up.
So I wrote that to highlight how users are going to think. And they aren't going to think like "we" do, in that they aren't as interested in promoting as they are doing where most of us are interested in both.
Right now, we've got what I'll call old schoolers. They have been here for a while, use Prop Tool, SPIN, and have a comfort level there. Some of these people may be anti-C, or they may just be pro-SPIN because that is where they live. For the anti-C crowd, they have to come to their own realizations and the best way to have them do that is make sure it's easy and let them see successes in C. Up to them. For the pro-SPIN people, having C there will see many of them explore and as code bodies build up, they may well start using C. Some requirement may well see them do this too.
And we've not new-schoolers. They have not been here as long, they may or may not be using Prop Tool at the moment, and they may or may not be using C and SPIN. These people need features and they need to see progress on SimpleIDE and most importantly, they need to see Parallax giving them the love the old-schoolers get. (To heater's point about promotion, etc...)
From there we have newbies and potentials. Again to Heater's point, they will simply compare what they have to what we've got and go from there. That isn't fair, but it's what they will do. Cost of change is a big deal for them, and it's actually a big deal for the old-school users too. Cost of change dilutes the feature / benefits we've got and so lowering that cost can often make sense. Here, SimpleIDE is best positioned for that task, as are a set of core, cross platform tools that could just as easily be used with something like Sublime, or whatever thing they have setup. Could be Eclipse for all we know, or that Code Blocks thing Ross is using. Or Notepad++
C on P1 can be a hard sell compared to SPIN+PASM for a lot of reasons. Not making a negative statement here, just fact. I think C on the P2 is going to be an entirely different matter. I think it's best to encourage C users on P1 and continue to make strides toward improving that. I don't think it makes any sense to convert anybody on P1. They use what they use. PropBasic, C, SPIN, whatever.
The Forthers will boot strap everything onto new chips, hardly miss a beat and they have what they need. No worries.
On P2, targeting C users is going to be a lot of fun! Migrating SPIN users is too, and I think some of them may well move over to C when they experience the more roomy, fast design too. Time will tell.
From my point-of-view, I see the stereotypical C smugness toward any language that is not C. Spin/PASM is the easiest way (my opinion) to implement sophisticated multi-core programs on the Propeller. I'm not against C, in fact, I was supportive of it before the Propeller was released (even though I'm not much of a C programmer). That said, Chip designed Spin to be the most elegant solution for the Propeller. It doesn't take more that five minutes of research to see that multi-core apps in C require a lot of beginner-intimidating jumping through hoops. Maybe this is what gives so many C programmers their smug attitude.
I would love to see the xBasic IDE (which is what the Simple IDE grew out of) bet setup as a cross-platform replacement for the Propeller Tool. Give new Propeller users an easy tool to use on any platform that allows them to take advantage of the offerings in ObEx -- without the complications of project management (which the Arduino users do not have to deal with). For those that require/desire a move to C, the step up to SimpleIDE would be less daunting.
These are just my opinions. Feel free to flame away -- I have thick skin.
I am not sure what programming tools he is talking about but if it is SimpleIDE I would hope that it could incorporate the features of the Spin 1 tool for Spin 2.
Edit: For us lazy people that don't like to type a lot! And if SimpleIDE is going to be the first tool available for the Propeller 2 I would hope it would be as easy to learn as the Propeller 1 tool.
A C/C++ ecosystem like the Arduino for the Propeller would be great. The Propeller is years behind in that respect. The Arduino having had opensource tools on it's side for a long time before Parallax caught up with the opensource idea.
As we haven't got such an ecosystem isn't better to make the best of what we have?
I guess there is an anti-C element. Or is it that there are just more people around here with experience in Spin who will naturally steer any question that way. No worries we all have our favorite languages.
This has turned into a rather long debate. All I was imagining was some notes and links re: SimpleIDE for Spin development in the Propeller pages. The original question was "Why not?". There does not seem to be any show stopping reason why not.
Promoting C may be to Parallax's advantage in the short run, since they can grab the low-hanging fruit among those who demand it. But unless C is used merely as a "gateway drug" for steering those users ultimately toward Spin, I do not think the Propeller's potential as a viable OEM solution will ever be realized in the long run. C is simply not cut out for the job and is the antithesis of every vision that Chip designed the Propeller around.
Also, for SimpleIDE to be a viable Spin tool, the "project" thing is an unnecessary and unhelpful complication that simply has to go away. They key here is productivity. Like semicolons and braces, "projects" are just one more speedbump that gets in the way.
-Phil