justifying the cost of stamp

kelvin james

not to make a big deal here, i use the stamp, i like it, it works for me, BUT, there seems to be less expensive ways to work with micros, like the PIC. Without me having to go into a major search and destroy on the web, why is this ? Is it because of coding/compiling, or hardware related issues? I really don't know. And i think most other new programmers would appreciate that info also. I really have not seen any comparison between the stamp and other micros yet, but may have not looked in the right place. Don't get me wrong here, the stamp is great for everything, no complaints, but to make a manufactured product, even with an OEM, with the cost, it seems pretty high. Don't want to ruffle any feathers, just want you guys to convince me i shouldn't be looking elsewhere. If this is the easiest way, then i am a happy camper !



"MY FIRST BORN WAS A ROBOT"

Dave Paton

It's the value add of having PBASIC onboard, a warranty, and having things like this forum with manufacturer's support, among other things. You can buy a PIC for a few bucks, get a programmer for a little more than the cost of a stamp, buy a BASIC or C compiler for the PIC for a couple fo hundred, and be all set. Or you can spend $80 on a stamp and a carrier board, download the free software, and get going.

I do both, depending on the project. I justify the Stamp's price easily, because the development time is a lot faster for most things in PBASIC, and because it's friendlyness reduces my stress level. Plus, I've been a stamp guy since the first Nuts & Volts article on the Stamp 1, and when Chip was the main technical contributor on the mailing list, so I feel some kind of odd moral obligation to them, just like I do to the Motorola 68HC811E2P and the PIC16F84.

-dave

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

kelvin james

OK . Cool Thanks Dave. Seems that you get nailed price wise in other aspects ( sotware, etc) that can contribute to the costs for other formats. I really do like the stamp for ease of programming, but am still concerned about moving it to the manufactucing mode. I guess the stamp is really a developmental tool? (DUH !, I try really hard to be smart) , and i guess i can implement into other cheaper formats, just guessing? My big concern is i am trying to make something low cost as possible, and the hardware costs just don't jive.
I think i speak for a lot of wannabie inventors out there, that could have the ability to develop and distribute an electonic product at a reasonable cost, without having to resort to "mass manufacturing" to bring a product to a price within the average consumer grasp.
C'mon SONY, I'll take ya on anyday!!
Seriously though, i like to start things, i like to finish them

---

without 100% markup to someone else.


"MY FIRST BORN WAS A ROBOT"

Bean

Kelvin,

· Check out the new SX/B BASIC compiler for the SX chip. http://www.parallax.com/sx/sxb.asp

· All you need is·the starter kit for $129 http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=45181

· The chips are from $1.79 http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=SX18AC/DP·for chips with 12 I/O pins

· or $4.80 for chips with 20 I/O pins http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=SX28AC/DP

· With the SX-Key you can set watch variables, set breakpoints and single step your code. All in BASIC.

Bean.
·

Jon Williams

Kelvin,

Contrary to popular belief, the BASIC Stamp is also a production tool; usually in the form of the OEM chip set, but this is not always the case. What sets the BASIC Stamp apart from the crowd -- I believe -- is that it has been around and proved itself to be incredibly robust. This is important when a manufaturer is setting up a production line monitoring system or similar critical industrial process. For high volume applications, the OEM chip set can bring costs into line without having to redevelop and retest code (steps tha take time, cost money, and delay product release to market).

As Bean pointed out, Parallax has made low cost production easier with the SX/B compiler. While not as full-featured as PBASIC, it's a very capable language and allows the advanced programmer to easily mix BASIC and assembly for the best combination of development speed and product performance.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax
Dallas Office

Chris Savage

In my business we need a reliable controller for various projects that come up.· But the hobbyist side of me always works to keep the cost down.· I get a little cheap on things like LCD Displays, Keypads, Cases/Enclosures, etc.· But I NEVER cheap out on the heart of the system...The BASIC Stamp has replaced, to date, 10 Z80 controllers we used in commercial boards that designed, with the exception of an Interrupt system on one, which was easily compensated for, and now with the SX & SX/B software could be realized anyway.· I'd say the BASIC Stamp is well worth it, and as was pointed out, there are the OEM parts for production level stuff.



▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Chris Savage

Knight Designs
324 West Main Street
P.O. Box 97
Montour Falls, NY 14865
(607) 535-6777

Business Page:·· http://www.knightdesigns.com
Personal Page:··· http://www.lightlink.com/dream/chris
Designs Page:··· http://www.lightlink.com/dream/designs
·

El Paisa

Is the SX family programming space enough for serious applications?

Jon Williams

Of course.· Not every "serious" application is gigantic.· If that were the case, we wouldn't be seeing so many 8-pin microcontrollers.· Just for fun, have a look at this, very serious, SX application: http://www.nurve.net/

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax
Dallas Office

El Paisa

Jon:
Interesting.
Could the SX52 run code from external SRAM? or the SRAM is just to store data?

El Paisa

Does Parallax supports the SX52BD/PQ ?
Evaluation Board with ZIF sockets?

Jon Williams

I'm not (yet) an SX expert, but I feel quite certain that the SX can only run its instructions from internal flash. That doesn't stop a person from creating a run-time engine (like we did for the BASIC Stamp) that can run externally-stored instructions of their design.

We do not currently have an evaluation board for the SX52 -- we tend to provide products that get asked for. With the resurgance of the SX, I'm sure you'll see more additions to the development tools in that line. Again, that will depend on the volume of customer requests.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax
Dallas Office

Dave Paton

kelvin james said...
My big concern is i am trying to make something low cost as possible, and the hardware costs just don't jive.

Honestly, if you want to move a project to the mass market with a Stamp as it's heart, you ave one of two options: Bite the bullet and increase the cost to compensate for the OEM component price and build the stamp into the product as part of the BOM, or re-engineer the software for something else (PICs or SXs). There's really no other options.

I've done both, and while the Stamp-based product didn't end up making it to the market (business forces, nothing to do with the technology), the converted (usign PICs and the awesome MELabs PICBASIC compiler) one did. Personally, I would have preferred the product built around the Stamp, since the addtional cost to move the design to a new processor was significant, and roughly doubled the development time since the code had to be completely refactored. Had the product been headed to a commodity market where cost reduction is measured in fractions of a cent per unit, the costs could have easily been justified over a production run of a million, but the space where I play isn't that big, and the added cost for the 5k annual volume we ended up with put it about the same as the Stamp versions would ahve worked out to.

It really depends on your business model, but for now, I'd suggest staying with the stamp. It's faster to develop the software with unless you truly grok C or ASM, the simplicity of PBASIC makes debugging faster, and the tight integration of the package makes things 'just work'.

As always, my $0.02, worth exactly what you've paid for it.

-dave

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

kelvin james

THankyou for all great info guys, i just wanted to make sure i was making the right decision for the development of my product. Though i have spent a lot of time working with the stamp, i am still basically pretty green when it comes to general micro knowledge. I certainly would not want to compromise the quality of the micro, just to make it cheaper, because what i'm trying to do here will be used in a professional application and it has to work, and work well all the time. But i was trying to fit the price into a not so professional price range. i guess i'll just have to bite the bullet and see if i can lower the quality of some of the other components. Just the optical encoder alone was well over $100. And if with anything else other than the stamp is harder to program, then they can keep it, because the stamp is more then my brain can handle at the best of times. Maybe once i get the code done, if it is possible, someone at parallax can give me some advice to combine all the components into one unit?
The bsp24 has been good to me so far, wish it had some more memory, but i have been consolidating some of the code, so i think i can get everything to fit on it.
All in all it is a great product, and the support here is amazing.
Thanks again kelvin

Dave Paton

Kelvin-

You might want to do some very hard looking around for alternate sources of components. The first thing I look at when sucking money out of a products is the high cost parts. In your case, it sounds like after the Stamp, the best place to start is that encoder. Can you use a lower resolution unit? Can you integrate it in another way? (encoder wheel with IR sensor) Who else makes the same kind of equipment? Is there a different solution to the same problem? These are all good questions when trying to design for cheapness.

-dave

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

Bean

I have found that it pays to search for inexpesive parts when designing a project. If you use the first thing you find, you may have to change the project significantly to work with a cheaper part later on. Unless you know that a project is going to be a one-off then I look for the easiest solution.

Bean.

El Paisa

· I know for a fact that if you intent stay and prosper in business you do not use cheapest part.
You·look the specs of the part and select the part that give you a reasonable life span.
Then you select the lowest cost part.
Remember to look for a long MTBF.

kelvin james

thankyou, all points are well taken. Yes, the encoder is expensive, a grayhill 256, but even to drop to a 128, the price difference is not that big, and encoder does have a 10 year warranty. And i since i have already finished the bulk of the code for this, it seems a waste of time to start adding new components , i would basically have to start over again. I think the year or so i have spent on this so far is quite enough and i just want to finish it and move on. As Bean said the "easiest solution", which it was for me, but also probably the most costly.
Obviously, i have set my own path, and now i have to follow it and hope for the best. Even at a higher cost, it will still be a fraction of the cost of the nearest competitor at the present.
I still have other hardware related issues to deal with as far as gearing , mounts, etc. , that i need to direct more time to. So i will stop belly-aching over the costs here, and just keep plugging away on what i have now. Actually i think i made some pretty good choices for what i needed, it will definately be high quality.
thanks again kelvin

Tracy Allen

If the product you are working on is a "platform" that can serve different purposes or different markets with a bit of reprogramming, then the Stamp will give you a big advantage over your competition. It is much much easier to dig into a program that is well structured and written in a higher level language, and it is an advantage that the system is field reprogrammable.

In parts, you can save money for one-off projects by buying surplus, but if you go into production, that can be a disaster. When those parts are gone, you will be left filling square holes with round pegs. Evaluate the sources and second sources carefully. Parallax has a great track record and reliable products and supply and support.

▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Tracy Allen
www.emesystems.com