justifying the cost of stamp
kelvin james
Posts: 531
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"
"MY FIRST BORN WAS A ROBOT"
Comments
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.
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"
· 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.
·
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
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
·
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Jon Williams
Applications Engineer, Parallax
Dallas Office
Interesting.
Could the SX52 run code from external SRAM? or the SRAM is just to store data?
Evaluation Board with ZIF sockets?
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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