If the Mac user community is as committed as you suggest, then I would recommend that they locate each other on this forum, band together, and create a piece of working GUI software that can take hex files from the PC SX-Key IDE, load them, display them, and download them to an Sx-Blitz. The specs for the Blitz are freely available on the Parallax website at this url:
I think for most projects like this to succeed, the onus tends to lie on a single individual to do the majority of the work. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing mind you. The trickiest issue in all this is the USB/Serial most likely.
But creating what you suggest, what would that give you? Simply a downloader, right? We'd still have no means of writing the software, correct?
Without the compiler and assembler, this is rather moot, isn't it?
I do understand that the STAMP is a different market from the SX. That the SX is primarily something you're selling in large quanities to manufacturers.
Where does the Propeller fit into all this? Is it positioned more along the lines of a high-powered STAMP replacement? Is that the better place to look at concentrating on things from the hobbiest point of view?
Why would you suggest that the first version be targeted at the BLITZ rather than, say, the Professional Development Board? It has the native USB support that Mac users would expect. And it'd be more bones for Parallax.
Plus, I don't have to justify to the wife buying a $29 blitz.. but I most certainly could use this as an opportunity to justify my PDB..
Why would you suggest that the first version be targeted at the BLITZ rather than, say, the Professional Development Board? It has the native USB support that Mac users would expect. And it'd be more bones for Parallax.
Plus, I don't have to justify to the wife buying a $29 blitz.. but I most certainly could use this as an opportunity to justify my PDB..
I think you are misunderstanding Peter, the PDB does not have the programmer for the SX, it is purchased seperately. Two products Parallax sells are capable of this, the SX-Blitz and the SX-Key. They are the same except the Blitz cannot debug a program written to an SX. The way debugging is performed by the SX-Key and the communication protocol between the IDE and SX-Key for debugging is a closely guarded secret of Parallax's. The SX-Key is the only SX programmer availible that provides in circuit debugging, and they won't share how they do it. But the programming portion they have made availible via the link Peter provided, so armed with that information, you can design a program on any platform to program an SX using a SX-Blitz.
Ah. I'd figured that it was capable of being programmed inline as the STAMP can. So I'd hoped that rather than messing with the USB -> Serial -> Blitz that it could be programmed in place in the PDB.
I agree that for these sort of projects to succeed, you need a single person who takes on the leadership position. With regards to the particular project I suggested, let me try and clarify further. As Paul pointed out, you need either a Blitz or Key to program the Sx chips. Currently, the protocol for debugging with the Sx-Key is not released to the general public, but the Blitz download protocol is public. The point of the project I have suggested allows the Mac community to demonstrate its ability to work together and create a polished piece of software that can be used easily by anyone who downloads it.
As I mentioned before, when Parallax open sourced the SX-Key IDE, no one but me did anytjhing more than download it, look at the source, and then put it away. Rather than have history repeat itself, I belive that the Mac community needs to demonstrate that they have the ability to creater a polished, working piece of software, and also to provide some sense to Parallax of the number of interested users. Borland spent a ton of money creating a Linux version of Delphi only to see very little revenue returned. It's one thing to say that creating a Mac/Linux product will create "another million customers (MAC / Linux based hobbyist)" as D Myers did, it's another to actually demonstrate with some provable numbers whether there are even another 1000 customers. My feeling was that the project I specified would provide a useful tool to the Mac community and provide a launchpad for further expansion depending on the success of it.
If I have still not made myself understood, let me know and I'll see if I can explain it better.
Thanks for bringing up this issue. I am an avid SX fan due to its raw speed. I am also a Mac user and it annoys me to no end that I have to use a PC to program the SX. I have used VirtualPc (on Dual 2.5Ghz PowerMac) but as of now there is no version available for the intel Macs.
I have moved my designs more and more to the AVR platform since I can use my Mac to do the developing and programing.
The funny part is that we use at least a 100K pieces of Atmel micros at my (public) company a year.
If the tool chain was available for the Mac I would be giving that business to SX today.
I would be interested in heading up such a project but need to gather some more information to see what size the community is for the SX. I also have to do my homework to understand what functionality is really required by such a program. I agree that one person needs to be the major driving force in a community. The key to getting a group to effectively work on a project is to divide the programming up into manageable tasks / function libraries with clear definition. This requires a lot of prep work / planning (define inputs, outputs, and function), but allows developers to come and go. The other option is to develop this with a group of friends and sell it for a couple of bucks to cover cost.
One of the things that prevents me from jumping right in feet first is the fact that there are plenty of tools for every other micro out there, so my beloved MAC community is covered with options, and this is not a project for the faint of heart. If I end up developing something, I may make a compiler that allows you to use TBasic or similar and compiler it for multiple micro platforms. Again research is required to see what is needed out there / what is already done. (To gain support by a community, it has to be interesting to them and something they need also).
So, I'm finally back from the office. My SX kit is expected on Friday, assuming shipping works out as I expected.
I've looked at the Reset documentation for the SX, but is there a technote/intructions on talking to the SX-Fire or Blitz via serial? and what the various commands are present?
I think a valid question has to be "Are people requesting a Mac version just because they prefer to use Macs, or because they really NEED a Mac version".
I personally have not met anyone who used a Mac for microcontroller development that didn't have a PC also. How many Mac users on this forum do not have a PC or a PC emulator ?
I know everyone has their favorite computer. And yes it would be nice if you would do SX development on your favorite computer, but is it really a requirement ? I don't know maybe it is ?
Again I'm not a Mac user and maybe I'm wrong (I thought I was wrong once....But I was mistaken [noparse];)[/noparse] if I am please let me know.
I'm not against making a Mac version, but to re-write everything in RealBasic just so it can be cross-compiled ? That's alot of man-hours considering the software is in Delphi (pascal).
Bean (Hitt Consulting) said...
I think a valid question has to be "Are people requesting a Mac version just because they prefer to use Macs, or because they really NEED a Mac version".
I personally have not met anyone who used a Mac for microcontroller development that didn't have a PC also. How many Mac users on this forum do not have a PC or a PC emulator ?
I know everyone has their favorite computer. And yes it would be nice if you would do SX development on your favorite computer, but is it really a requirement ? I don't know maybe it is ?
Again I'm not a Mac user and maybe I'm wrong (I thought I was wrong once....But I was mistaken [noparse];)[/noparse] if I am please let me know.
I'm not against making a Mac version, but to re-write everything in RealBasic just so it can be cross-compiled ? That's alot of man-hours considering the software is in Delphi (pascal).
Bean.
Bean, old bean, your timing could not be better. Today Apple announced "Boot Camp" which will permit dual booting Mac OS-X and Win XP Home/pro on Mac Intel-based hardware. This is great news in general, but sadly will slow down all efforts to make decent Mac versions of heretofore Winders only applications. The VirtualPC Windows emulator has always been a kluge and a pain to use. this will probably speed the adoption of the new Intel hardware and i would not al all be surprised to see Leopard (OS X 10.5) come out with support for NTFS file system, up to now its been FAT32 only, so that the Mac side can read/write to the Windows partition of the disk.(No we are not holding our collective breaths waiting for Bronco Billy to support Apple's HFS+! <grin>)
I think this announcement by Apple render most of this discussion moot.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
cheers ... brian riley, n1bq, underhill center, vermont
Sanguish said...
I've looked at the Reset documentation for the SX, but is there a technote/intructions on talking to the SX-Fire or Blitz via serial? and what the various commands are present?
I'm really lost here. What is the "Reset" documentation? What is an SX-Fire? And your last sentence sounds a bit like Yoda-speak, so not sure I am what want you do.
OK, sorry. I've looked at the SX programming documentation. But it doesn't seem to talk in serial terms. I'm hoping that the SX-Key or SK-Blitz doc covers that more.
But, is there doc on how to communicate with the SK-Key or Blitz? I've not been able to find that.
Boot Camp doesn't solve the issue, not by a long shot. Not everyone is going to have access to Intel based Macintosh machines. Second, rebooting to work in Windows is not the same solution as having something native to compile, and download from. And finally, while Boot Camp is currently a free beta, Windows XP Pro isn't, and a legal copy will cost you something on the order of $300.
I'm not sure where the Real Basic suggestion came from. That seems like a wasted direction to me. however detaching the tools (comp, and asm) and considering offering those in a library format like Stamp items are, would be a positive step.
Anyways, I've put my money where my mouth is on this and ordered all the bits, along with the help of one or two others on the forum have collected the sample files I need. I just need to find documentation that explains how to program via the SX-Key in a manner I can grok (the STAMP programmming doc was quite helpful.. if I can find a serial one of those beggars I may play with that, or see if I can get the USB one I have working)
$300 for Windows XP? Nope - you can buy a new copy of windows xp home sp2 oem for about $90 from many sources - just use Google or Froogle to locate them.
Randy Glenn said...
Not quite - there are still several million PowerPC Macs out there, for whose users the Boot Camp announcement means nothing.
Unless I'm getting a free upgrade soon that I wasn't expecting, I'll still be looking for a Mac compatible option.
That is not the point. Between the Intel shift in the Mac hardware and "Boot Camp" there is now less reason the ever for the developers for the chip manufacturers to develope for Mac Platform, specifically the PPC platform.
Now, that said, it occurs to me that wise developers, now that Mac has gone Intel, will posture their future code so that it can be more readily cross platform. There may be a future, but it is a way's off. The immediate future holds a slim prospect for PPC based versions of microP IDEs.
Before you shoot the messenger here, I am Mac head from way back. I do almost everything on a 1st iteration iMac G5 and a 1.5 GHz 12" PowerBook. I have a Shuttle XPC Athlon 2100+ based system that is almost exclusively Parallax, Microchip and Motorola.
What I see happening for me, is that sometime this Fall I am going to get a MacBookPro, and spend the extra bucks for a larger HD to partition and dual boot OSX / XP Pro. There have been some hardware glitches on that platform (they are up to rev D mobo already) and I want to wait until it settles down. I know not everyone can afford new Apple hardware, but I have a bit of an inside edge, my #2 son is an Apple rep and he has a great discount.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
cheers ... brian riley, n1bq, underhill center, vermont
Brian Riley wrote -- Now, that said, it occurs to me that wise developers, now that Mac has gone Intel, will posture their future code so that it can be more readily cross platform. There may be a future, but it is a way's off. The immediate future holds a slim prospect for PPC based versions of microP IDEs.
That may be true. Certainly for the commercial oriented products. However for the hobbiest oriented stuff, I'm not so sure. Anyways, it hasn't stopped me from my work on the SX stuff (or STAMP). hopefully something will come to fruition shortly.
Modularity is not a bad idea. Break up future development into several components, the IDE, Assmebler, Basic Compiler, and Debugger. Also, CCS has Linux versions of all their products so a Linux (or MAC OS X) version may not be that difficult to create at least for C. If the assembler is written in C, porting it over may not be a terribly big job which brings us to the SX Basic compiler. If it is written in Delphi like the windows version of the PBASIC tokenizer it can be ported to Linux and FreeBSD either through Kylix or Lazuras (the open source delphi for Linux and BSD) Lazuras code will run on the MAC with OS X. That would leave only the debugger interface to port. Eclipse is nice for new development but porting older products really isn't practical. Regardless of which approach would be taken, it's doubtful if a MAC or Linux version would be working in the near future. But for the distant future there certainly is hope. I think as time goes on Parallax will do what is right both for the customers and the market. Let's remember guys, that for a small company they have moved swiftly and have teir hands full with new parts and languages right now. They have done a banner job when you consider their size.
If one of you would make a command-line tool for directly writing to the Blitz.
A compiler/IDE wouldn't be that hard to get started on SourceForge.
The compiler could concievably even be written in Java or Python.
Once again, a lot of us MAC guys have a PC lying around, but it is a serious inconvenience to keep our thoughts on one computer and have to program or burn on another. For instance, say I am at my boring relatives house with my PowerBook G4 and want to work on my code; wait a second that's at home on that big clunky PC. You get the idea. Dual boot is nice and a work around, but I am not going to run out and buy a new Intel based MAC laptop just for micro development and neither will most other MAC users. (Boot camp only works with the new Intel based MACs.)
The real point is that you can currently download C compilers for the MAC platform for most of the other micros out there so why not just switch to another micro if you are a MAC user.
I still think there would be an interest in creating a universal PBasic compiler. Something like Eclipse, maybe use Eclipse.
And yes, thank you Parallax for your support thus far. I have a complete understanding of the difficulty small businesses have making discussions of what to support when with limited resources. But again, don't be afraid of the open source community, remember they helped developed Linux; no small feat. I would love to lead a team to accomplish something like this, I find it quit intriguing myself. My main responsibility right know is to finish up some additional schooling. This carries through June. Let me know if this is something you (Parallax) would like to talk about.
Comments
you said
If the Mac user community is as committed as you suggest, then I would recommend that they locate each other on this forum, band together, and create a piece of working GUI software that can take hex files from the PC SX-Key IDE, load them, display them, and download them to an Sx-Blitz. The specs for the Blitz are freely available on the Parallax website at this url:
I think for most projects like this to succeed, the onus tends to lie on a single individual to do the majority of the work. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing mind you. The trickiest issue in all this is the USB/Serial most likely.
But creating what you suggest, what would that give you? Simply a downloader, right? We'd still have no means of writing the software, correct?
Without the compiler and assembler, this is rather moot, isn't it?
What exactly would be displayed??
I do understand that the STAMP is a different market from the SX. That the SX is primarily something you're selling in large quanities to manufacturers.
Where does the Propeller fit into all this? Is it positioned more along the lines of a high-powered STAMP replacement? Is that the better place to look at concentrating on things from the hobbiest point of view?
Gah, one more question before I get back to work.
Why would you suggest that the first version be targeted at the BLITZ rather than, say, the Professional Development Board? It has the native USB support that Mac users would expect. And it'd be more bones for Parallax.
Plus, I don't have to justify to the wife buying a $29 blitz.. but I most certainly could use this as an opportunity to justify my PDB..
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
·1+1=10
I agree that for these sort of projects to succeed, you need a single person who takes on the leadership position. With regards to the particular project I suggested, let me try and clarify further. As Paul pointed out, you need either a Blitz or Key to program the Sx chips. Currently, the protocol for debugging with the Sx-Key is not released to the general public, but the Blitz download protocol is public. The point of the project I have suggested allows the Mac community to demonstrate its ability to work together and create a polished piece of software that can be used easily by anyone who downloads it.
As I mentioned before, when Parallax open sourced the SX-Key IDE, no one but me did anytjhing more than download it, look at the source, and then put it away. Rather than have history repeat itself, I belive that the Mac community needs to demonstrate that they have the ability to creater a polished, working piece of software, and also to provide some sense to Parallax of the number of interested users. Borland spent a ton of money creating a Linux version of Delphi only to see very little revenue returned. It's one thing to say that creating a Mac/Linux product will create "another million customers (MAC / Linux based hobbyist)" as D Myers did, it's another to actually demonstrate with some provable numbers whether there are even another 1000 customers. My feeling was that the project I specified would provide a useful tool to the Mac community and provide a launchpad for further expansion depending on the success of it.
If I have still not made myself understood, let me know and I'll see if I can explain it better.
Thanks, PeterM
Thanks for bringing up this issue. I am an avid SX fan due to its raw speed. I am also a Mac user and it annoys me to no end that I have to use a PC to program the SX. I have used VirtualPc (on Dual 2.5Ghz PowerMac) but as of now there is no version available for the intel Macs.
I have moved my designs more and more to the AVR platform since I can use my Mac to do the developing and programing.
The funny part is that we use at least a 100K pieces of Atmel micros at my (public) company a year.
If the tool chain was available for the Mac I would be giving that business to SX today.
Reza
Feel free to PM me, or email sanguish via google
One of the things that prevents me from jumping right in feet first is the fact that there are plenty of tools for every other micro out there, so my beloved MAC community is covered with options, and this is not a project for the faint of heart. If I end up developing something, I may make a compiler that allows you to use TBasic or similar and compiler it for multiple micro platforms. Again research is required to see what is needed out there / what is already done. (To gain support by a community, it has to be interesting to them and something they need also).
Will let you know.
Dwayne
I've looked at the Reset documentation for the SX, but is there a technote/intructions on talking to the SX-Fire or Blitz via serial? and what the various commands are present?
I personally have not met anyone who used a Mac for microcontroller development that didn't have a PC also. How many Mac users on this forum do not have a PC or a PC emulator ?
I know everyone has their favorite computer. And yes it would be nice if you would do SX development on your favorite computer, but is it really a requirement ? I don't know maybe it is ?
Again I'm not a Mac user and maybe I'm wrong (I thought I was wrong once....But I was mistaken [noparse];)[/noparse] if I am please let me know.
I'm not against making a Mac version, but to re-write everything in RealBasic just so it can be cross-compiled ? That's alot of man-hours considering the software is in Delphi (pascal).
Bean.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"SX-Video·Module"·available from Parallax for only $28.95 http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30012
"SX-Video OSD module"·available from Parallax for only·$49.95 http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=30015
Product web site: www.sxvm.com
Available now! Cheap 4-digit LED display with driver IC·www.hc4led.com
"I reject your reality, and substitute my own." Mythbusters
·
Bean, old bean, your timing could not be better. Today Apple announced "Boot Camp" which will permit dual booting Mac OS-X and Win XP Home/pro on Mac Intel-based hardware. This is great news in general, but sadly will slow down all efforts to make decent Mac versions of heretofore Winders only applications. The VirtualPC Windows emulator has always been a kluge and a pain to use. this will probably speed the adoption of the new Intel hardware and i would not al all be surprised to see Leopard (OS X 10.5) come out with support for NTFS file system, up to now its been FAT32 only, so that the Mac side can read/write to the Windows partition of the disk.(No we are not holding our collective breaths waiting for Bronco Billy to support Apple's HFS+! <grin>)
I think this announcement by Apple render most of this discussion moot.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
cheers ... brian riley, n1bq, underhill center, vermont
Unless I'm getting a free upgrade soon that I wasn't expecting, I'll still be looking for a Mac compatible option.
Thanks, PeterM
But, is there doc on how to communicate with the SK-Key or Blitz? I've not been able to find that.
I'm not sure where the Real Basic suggestion came from. That seems like a wasted direction to me. however detaching the tools (comp, and asm) and considering offering those in a library format like Stamp items are, would be a positive step.
Anyways, I've put my money where my mouth is on this and ordered all the bits, along with the help of one or two others on the forum have collected the sample files I need. I just need to find documentation that explains how to program via the SX-Key in a manner I can grok (the STAMP programmming doc was quite helpful.. if I can find a serial one of those beggars I may play with that, or see if I can get the USB one I have working)
Go re-read my post from 3/27 where I covered the SX-Blitz documentation issue and even provided a direct link to it in the post.
Thanks, PeterM
Thanks Peter
That is not the point. Between the Intel shift in the Mac hardware and "Boot Camp" there is now less reason the ever for the developers for the chip manufacturers to develope for Mac Platform, specifically the PPC platform.
Now, that said, it occurs to me that wise developers, now that Mac has gone Intel, will posture their future code so that it can be more readily cross platform. There may be a future, but it is a way's off. The immediate future holds a slim prospect for PPC based versions of microP IDEs.
Before you shoot the messenger here, I am Mac head from way back. I do almost everything on a 1st iteration iMac G5 and a 1.5 GHz 12" PowerBook. I have a Shuttle XPC Athlon 2100+ based system that is almost exclusively Parallax, Microchip and Motorola.
What I see happening for me, is that sometime this Fall I am going to get a MacBookPro, and spend the extra bucks for a larger HD to partition and dual boot OSX / XP Pro. There have been some hardware glitches on that platform (they are up to rev D mobo already) and I want to wait until it settles down. I know not everyone can afford new Apple hardware, but I have a bit of an inside edge, my #2 son is an Apple rep and he has a great discount.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
cheers ... brian riley, n1bq, underhill center, vermont
That may be true. Certainly for the commercial oriented products. However for the hobbiest oriented stuff, I'm not so sure. Anyways, it hasn't stopped me from my work on the SX stuff (or STAMP). hopefully something will come to fruition shortly.
A compiler/IDE wouldn't be that hard to get started on SourceForge.
The compiler could concievably even be written in Java or Python.
way, huge, monsterously bigger deal.
(just got my SX stuff on Friday.. firing up Xcode today)
The real point is that you can currently download C compilers for the MAC platform for most of the other micros out there so why not just switch to another micro if you are a MAC user.
I still think there would be an interest in creating a universal PBasic compiler. Something like Eclipse, maybe use Eclipse.
And yes, thank you Parallax for your support thus far. I have a complete understanding of the difficulty small businesses have making discussions of what to support when with limited resources. But again, don't be afraid of the open source community, remember they helped developed Linux; no small feat. I would love to lead a team to accomplish something like this, I find it quit intriguing myself. My main responsibility right know is to finish up some additional schooling. This carries through June. Let me know if this is something you (Parallax) would like to talk about.
Dwayne
Dwayne