17 Apr
2012
17 Apr
'12
2:41 a.m.
I find the dislike of the Arduino by some people in this forum a bit
silly, yet funny in a history-repeating way. The Arduino, in my
opinion, occupies roughly the same space that the Vic-20 (or ZX-81)
did back in its day. It's a great intro to the field.
Sure, the cool kids are building their own computers using S-100
cards, the rich kids are buying far more capable Apples and Tandys;
the pros use minis. And while most Vic-20 users never get beyond
playing copied versions of Lunar Lander, some of them get sufficiently
interested to go on to better things and delve deeper, hitting the
limitations and working around them. Remember - neither the VIC-20 or
ZX-81 came with any info on how to program them in anything other than
the (very limited) BASIC.
More importantly, the Arduino disrupted the microcontroller dev board
market in such a way that to get any mindshare these days you need to
have a sub-$100 board to get hobbyists interested, AND have a
(reasonable, and open or at least free) click-and-compile IDE with it.
Joe.
PS. I apologize for mixing technologies of different time frames in
the example above. That whole period was a bit of a blur to me.
Pedants, be pedantic, please :-)
--
Joachim Thiemann :: http://jthiem.bitbucket.org
17 Apr
17 Apr
6:49 a.m.
On Apr 17, 2012, at 5:41 AM, Joachim Thiemann wrote:
I find the dislike of the Arduino by some people in
this forum a bit
silly, yet funny in a history-repeating way. The Arduino, in my
opinion, occupies roughly the same space that the Vic-20 (or ZX-81)
did back in its day. It's a great intro to the field.
Joe.
I Love this! Good analogy Joe.
Rob
Robert Borsuk
rborsuk at colourfull.com
Colourfull Creations
http://www.colourfull.com
7:54 a.m.
Joachim,
On 4/17/2012 5:41 AM, Joachim Thiemann wrote:
I find the dislike of the Arduino by some people in
this forum a bit
silly, yet funny in a history-repeating way.
Silly isn't a strong enough word in my opinion.
I'm not exactly sure where the animosity comes from, because I think
that the arduino has done a great service to the community. At least in
terms of driving down prices on all boards of this nature. And it's not
just microcontrollers ---- FPGA boards, eval boards, accessories that
are easily driven from a microcontroller (like gps boards, etc).
Increased availability of parts.
There's more attention on the overall field, more people making
projects, more support and a larger advertising base for magazines. I
really think it goes on and on.
While they aren't likely to admit this, a lot of the old fogies here
specifically don't like the accessibility and ease of use. Projects
that used to require a specific set of hard-won and war-won battle
skills/medals to build and create now no longer do. So the barriers to
entry to have been removed, and they're pissed. The elite club they
worked hard to join with a large learning curve is now handing out free
memberships. Boo hoo.
It's similar to the no-code ham FCC license change(no longer requiring a
morse code test to obtain a license to transmit) years ago. The old
hams, while simultaneously complaining that their dying hobby was
growing smaller and smaller, said that this was the end of the world and
that the local repeaters would become the CB world of the 80's.
Guess what happened? Practically nothing, besides the fact that the
number of applications for a HAM license shot through the roof, and the
hobby was expanded and sustained through a surge of new hams. The
increased number of hams mean more ham equipment sales, more people to
support shareware that is out there, and so on.
The bottom line re:arduino is that anything that expands the community
by enabling people to build things that they want to build is a win-win
for me. Who cares if they don't want to solder? Who cares if they don't
want to understand digital logic? Who cares if they aren't seeking true
enlightenment? These people aren't even necessarily hobbyists -- they
are people who want to solve a problem. Why care about the way they go
about solving it?
Damn Whippersnappers.
Keith
P.S. One other thing, get your damn car going 10 miles under the speed
limit the hell out of the fast lane.
8:09 a.m.
On 4/17/2012 8:54 AM, Keith Monahan wrote:
Joachim,
On 4/17/2012 5:41 AM, Joachim Thiemann wrote:
I don't drive. I just wonder if the new mini-boards really teach anything.
What is left to control? Toilets even are done. I just find it
difficult to see
how the uControlers can get past the Toy/Demo stage.
Ben.
PS. I think the idea of big racks, and blinking lights has a little to
with my mind set.
I find the dislike of the Arduino by some people
in this forum a bit
silly, yet funny in a history-repeating way.
Silly isn't a strong enough word in my opinion.
I'm not exactly sure where the animosity comes from, because I think
that the arduino has done a great service to the community. At least in
terms of driving down prices on all boards of this nature. And it's not
just microcontrollers ---- FPGA boards, eval boards, accessories that
are easily driven from a microcontroller (like gps boards, etc).
Increased availability of parts.
There's more attention on the overall field, more people making
projects, more support and a larger advertising base for magazines. I
really think it goes on and on.
While they aren't likely to admit this, a lot of the old fogies here
specifically don't like the accessibility and ease of use. Projects that
used to require a specific set of hard-won and war-won battle
skills/medals to build and create now no longer do. So the barriers to
entry to have been removed, and they're pissed. The elite club they
worked hard to join with a large learning curve is now handing out free
memberships. Boo hoo.
It's similar to the no-code ham FCC license change(no longer requiring a
morse code test to obtain a license to transmit) years ago. The old
hams, while simultaneously complaining that their dying hobby was
growing smaller and smaller, said that this was the end of the world and
that the local repeaters would become the CB world of the 80's.
Guess what happened? Practically nothing, besides the fact that the
number of applications for a HAM license shot through the roof, and the
hobby was expanded and sustained through a surge of new hams. The
increased number of hams mean more ham equipment sales, more people to
support shareware that is out there, and so on.
The bottom line re:arduino is that anything that expands the community
by enabling people to build things that they want to build is a win-win
for me. Who cares if they don't want to solder? Who cares if they don't
want to understand digital logic? Who cares if they aren't seeking true
enlightenment? These people aren't even necessarily hobbyists -- they
are people who want to solve a problem. Why care about the way they go
about solving it?
Damn Whippersnappers.
Keith
P.S. One other thing, get your damn car going 10 miles under the speed
limit the hell out of the fast lane.
8:30 a.m.
I'm not exactly sure where the animosity comes
from, because I think
that the arduino has done a great service to the community. At least
in terms of driving down prices on all boards of this nature.
That's not entirely good; look at the peecee hardware quality race to
the bottom when clones started forcing cost-cutting everywhere. To be
sure, there was a lot of headroom to start with (both here and with
peecees). But once that headroom is gone, all that's left is to cut
quality.
While they aren't likely to admit this, a lot of
the old fogies here
specifically don't like the accessibility and ease of use. Projects
that used to require a specific set of hard-won and war-won battle
skills/medals to build and create now no longer do. So the barriers
to entry to have been removed, and they're pissed. The elite club
they worked hard to join with a large learning curve is now handing
out free memberships. Boo hoo.
There's probably some of that. But this, too, is not unmixed; the flip
side of removing barriers to entry is...removing barriers to entry.
You not only are making it easier for newbies to join the hobby, you
are also making it easier for...lamers? People who have no real
interest in the hobby but want credit for being 1337 h4x0rz, to whom an
Arduino is not an entry into a fascinating world but a cheap way to
sleaze credit for something they don't really deserve credit for.
The bottom line re:arduino is that anything that
expands the
community by enabling people to build things that they want to build
is a win-win for me. Who cares if they don't want to solder? Who
cares if they don't want to understand digital logic? Who cares if
they aren't seeking true enlightenment? These people aren't even
necessarily hobbyists -- they are people who want to solve a problem.
Why care about the way they go about solving it?
Because I've seen what's happened to other worlds when such people
joined it. Electronics (I especially notice computer electronics, but
other kinds too). The net. Software (having a harder time there,
fortunately). Cars. Pretty much anything even vaguely complicated,
and even some things that aren't - it's taken me years to find a
good-quality manual tin opener.
Commoditize something and it becomes hard to find people who care about
it (either as users or vendors) any longer. Sometimes they're forced
out of business; sometimes they're just drowned out - it's a lot easier
to find four serious computer stores when they're the only computer
stores than it is to find the four serious computer stores amid four
hundred cheap-crap computer stores.
Not that I consider it totally bleak, mind you. Your arguments do have
force. I just don't think the picture is as one-sided as you make it
sound.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
8 a.m.
On Apr 17, 2012, at 5:41 AM, Joachim Thiemann wrote:
I find the dislike of the Arduino by some people in
this forum a bit
silly, yet funny in a history-repeating way. The Arduino, in my
opinion, occupies roughly the same space that the Vic-20 (or ZX-81)
did back in its day. It's a great intro to the field.
To be clear, I don't dislike the Arduino, not at all. It's great at
what it does, just like a PET. I just don't like when people get the
idea to shoehorn it into something it's totally inappropriate for,
which is something I *do* see a lot (much like Mouse's example where
a simple 555 circuit would have made much more sense).
I was just as mad when management at one of our clients forced us to
use Linux on a little embedded board where the microcontroller was
only going to be used for housekeeping; with a tiny little event loop
for an OS, we could have done the job with a 50 MHz ARM, but instead
we ended up with an 800 MHz PowerPC which caused us no end of trouble
(not least because it was a buggy chip, which is maybe a separate
issue). I like Linux, and I like PowerPCs, but they didn't belong
there.
More importantly, the Arduino disrupted the
microcontroller dev board
market in such a way that to get any mindshare these days you need to
have a sub-$100 board to get hobbyists interested, AND have a
(reasonable, and open or at least free) click-and-compile IDE with it.
Yes, that's what's great about it. And when you're inducting newbies
into anything, you're bound to get some questionable attempts like
what I described; that's just called "learning". :-) I guess my
irritation comes when people do something like that when they should
damn well know better, which does occasionally happen ("Hey, I need
some blinking LEDs; maybe we could use an Arduino!").
- Dave
9:02 a.m.
here's your solution:
http://dmitry.co/index.php?p=./04.Thoughts/07.+Linux+on+8bit#uniqstr_133311…
Jim
On 4/17/2012 8:00 AM, David Riley wrote:
To be clear, I don't dislike the Arduino, not at
all. It's great at
what it does, just like a PET. I just don't like when people get the
idea to shoehorn it into something it's totally inappropriate for,
which is something I*do* see a lot (much like Mouse's example where
a simple 555 circuit would have made much more sense).
I was just as mad when management at one of our clients forced us to
use Linux on a little embedded board where the microcontroller was
only going to be used for housekeeping; with a tiny little event loop
for an OS, we could have done the job with a 50 MHz ARM, but instead
we ended up with an 800 MHz PowerPC which caused us no end of trouble
(not least because it was a buggy chip, which is maybe a separate
issue). I like Linux, and I like PowerPCs, but they didn't belong
there.
9:19 a.m.
On Apr 17, 2012, at 12:02 PM, jim s wrote:
here's your solution:
http://dmitry.co/index.php?p=./04.Thoughts/07.+Linux+on+8bit#uniqstr_133311…
BWAHAHAHA, that's the funniest damn thing I've seen in a while.
"You can type a command and get a reply within a minute."
I mean, besides the project's obviously satirical intent, that's
still pretty cool.
- Dave
7:28 p.m.
On 4/17/2012 10:00 AM, David Riley wrote:
To be clear, I don't dislike the Arduino, not at
all. It's great at
what it does, just like a PET. I just don't like when people get the
idea to shoehorn it into something it's totally inappropriate for,
which is something I *do* see a lot (much like Mouse's example where a
simple 555 circuit would have made much more sense).
Not trying to pick a fight,
but I will respectfully disagree. I suspect
we all have been working on a job, needed a specific tool we did not
possess, and decided to repurpose another tool wholly inappropriate for
the task to accomplish the goal. Why? Because the job needed done and
we decided that the goal was the job, not the perfect use of a tool.
Sure, we could go buy the right tool, but we didn't.
We probably don't do it often, but I think the only people that can
safely complain over the use of a arduino instead of a 555 are those who
have never in their lives used a tool in anything but its preferred
domain. I suspect that list of people is suitably small.
Mind you, I cringe a bit when I see someone using a MEGA32 instead of a
555 or a set of logic gates, but then I remember that the IC is not
their goal, the output or the thing being cycled/timed/on shotted, etc.
is the goal. Kudos to them for finding a way to get to the goal as
quickly as possible. While I whine about misuse of tooling, they are
creating/innovation/learning.
I'll also admit the arduino bothered me, someone who built their own
parallel port AVR programmer, created projects from scratch with the
avr-gcc toolchain, installed and configured avrdude to do the
programming, and wired up my own AVR on perfboard. However, at some
point, I started to smile that arduino had created a huge market for
AVR-compatible items, and it had raised the visibility of the AVR. I
was glad, because for the longest time, PIC sat on top of the hobby
community, and Parallax's BASIC Stamp and stuff like that reigned. As
someone who compared the PIC to the AVR 8 bit line and found the PIC
lagging significantly in many areas except part options and price, I was
glad the better architecture found a chance to shine.
On 4/17/2012 7:42 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
I have a little Duemilanove here. I'm used to 'bare metal' PIC18
coding. Since you probably know: what's the quickest route to that on
the Arduino, given that my host is OS X/PPC... I was a little
disturbed by the "just press play" IDE.
Get an AVR programmer (AVR ISP Mk II is a good choice, lots of cheap
clones if you're not Win7 64 bit. Don't try a clone on Win7 64 bit,
trust me, lots of pain and frustration)
Grab a copy of WinAVR off the net.
get avrdude running and attach a programming port to the Arduino clone
(pins are described in the datasheet for the AVR on the board)
Feel free to ask folks like myself for help.
Jim
8:09 p.m.
On Apr 17, 2012, at 10:28 PM, Jim Brain wrote:
Not trying to pick a fight, but I will respectfully
disagree. I suspect we all have been working on a job, needed a specific tool we did not
possess, and decided to repurpose another tool wholly inappropriate for the task to
accomplish the goal. Why? Because the job needed done and we decided that the goal was
the job, not the perfect use of a tool. Sure, we could go buy the right tool, but we
didn't.
Well, yes. When all you've got is a hammer, you need to learn how
to make more things act like nails. I suppose I wasn't considering
situations where you're constrained by availability; I'm more
concerned by people who don't even think about what they're putting
down because that's "too much work".
Mind you, I cringe a bit when I see someone using a
MEGA32 instead of a 555 or a set of logic gates, but then I remember that the IC is not
their goal, the output or the thing being cycled/timed/on shotted, etc. is the goal.
Kudos to them for finding a way to get to the goal as quickly as possible. While I whine
about misuse of tooling, they are creating/innovation/learning.
True. All the clever 555 hacks in the world don't matter if your
product doesn't ship on time.
Usually, anyway.
I'll also admit the arduino bothered me, someone
who built their own parallel port AVR programmer, created projects from scratch with the
avr-gcc toolchain, installed and configured avrdude to do the programming, and wired up my
own AVR on perfboard. However, at some point, I started to smile that arduino had created
a huge market for AVR-compatible items, and it had raised the visibility of the AVR. I
was glad, because for the longest time, PIC sat on top of the hobby community, and
Parallax's BASIC Stamp and stuff like that reigned. As someone who compared the PIC
to the AVR 8 bit line and found the PIC lagging significantly in many areas except part
options and price, I was glad the better architecture found a chance to shine.
Absolutely agreed. The PIC can rot in hell (maybe that's an
overreaction, but I've been forced to use it by clients who were
"uncomfortable" because they didn't know about anything else).
I like the AVR for a lot of things, and I'm glad it's getting its
day; I'm also glad it's getting an overhaul with the XMEGA series,
though I wish the debug tools were more stable on OSX.
Curiously, it's terrible for writing a Forth interpreter (as I
suspect many Harvard architecture machines are), but I'm quite
sure the PIC would be a lot worse.
On 4/17/2012 7:42 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
Well, he's using a Mac, so WinAVR isn't that helpful. I've
gotten the patched GCC toolchain up and running well enough to
program my XMEGA-based wireless sensor nodes, but I'm not so
thrilled with how well it works. It's probably better on non-
XMEGAs, but I'm not working with any of them right now.
Toby: the AVR Dragon is a nice $50 programmer from Atmel which
does the job admirably on most AVRs (especially now that they've
lifted the 32K limit for debugging). You'll need a Windows
machine to run their software to update its firmware to get the
latest fixes (like lifting that 32K limit), though. I'll be
glad to help if you need to get the toolchain running on OSX.
- Dave
I have a little Duemilanove here. I'm used to 'bare metal' PIC18 coding.
Since you probably know: what's the quickest route to that on the Arduino, given that
my host is OS X/PPC... I was a little disturbed by the "just press play" IDE.
Get an AVR programmer (AVR ISP Mk II is a good choice, lots of cheap clones if you're
not Win7 64 bit. Don't try a clone on Win7 64 bit, trust me, lots of pain and
frustration)
Grab a copy of WinAVR off the net.
get avrdude running and attach a programming port to the Arduino clone (pins are
described in the datasheet for the AVR on the board)
Feel free to ask folks like myself for help. 
18 Apr
18 Apr
8:46 a.m.
In article <C4B7BE84-6ED2-46D0-9D5C-F4975022014D at gmail.com>,
David Riley <fraveydank at gmail.com> writes:
True. All the clever 555 hacks in the world don't
matter if your
product doesn't ship on time.
...or if you don't know the "clever 555 hacks".
Visibility of arduino in the hobbyist space is HUGE. While the 555
has been around a long time and has it's own "hacker" tradition built
around it, for whatever reason it isn't visible in the current
hobbyist community.
In 2 years of running a make group, people talk about Arduino all the
time. I don't recall anyone ever having mentioned the 555.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 version available for download
<http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
12:26 p.m.
In article <C4B7BE84-6ED2-46D0-9D5C-F4975022014D at gmail.com>,
David Riley <fraveydank at gmail.com> writes:
Of course that works both ways. All the Arduino hacks won't help if yopu
don't know them. Or if you don't have an Arduino board to hand.
Personally, I have plenty of 555s (and other common ICs) and no Arwduinos
True. All the clever 555 hacks in the world
don't matter if your
product doesn't ship on time.
...or if you don't know the "clever 555 hacks".
Visibility of arduino in the hobbyist space is HUGE. While the 555
has been around a long time and has it's own "hacker" tradition built
around it, for whatever reason it isn't visible in the current
hobbyist community.
In 2 years of running a make group, people talk about Arduino all the
time. I don't recall anyone ever having mentioned the 555.
That is _exactly_ the problem I am referign to. For some odd reason these
pre-build microcontrolelr goards turn up everywhere whereas using simpler
compoentns, albeit ones you ahve to sodler together yourself, have been
forgotten.
I am not sure which is easier to learn and then to design with. Certainly
I know that _I_ can design quite a complex circuit and have it soldered
up long bewfore I could write the code (in any language) to do the same
thing. But that's probalby becuase I've been doing that for 30 years or more.
-tony
2:56 p.m.
While the 555
has been around a long time and has it's own "hacker" tradition built
around it, for whatever reason it isn't visible in the current
hobbyist community.
The 555 is starting to be not very visible in industry, either. There are
very few applications these days that are so simple - there always seems to
be some sort of microprocessor hanging around that can be in some ways
utilized - with the advantage of not needing the 555s resistors and
capacitors and all the issues they bring.
--
Will
4:23 p.m.
On 18/04/2012 22:56, William Donzelli wrote:
> While the 555
> has been around a long time and has it's own "hacker" tradition built
> around it, for whatever reason it isn't visible in the current
> hobbyist community.
Its odd really. As some of you may have notice I am a
Radio, and so chat
to other hams locally on a daily basis. Any way a fellow ham (and
friend) was discussing building a simple control panel with discrete
logic. I suggested he used an 8-pin PIC chip but he said no it was
simpler in real logic. I said I could already detect scope creep and a
PIC would give more room for this. Well after a week when the simple
chip count was up to 4 just to run the buttons, he reluctantly swapped
to a PIC chip. It was cheaper, and gave a lower component count. Sadly
as this was just a one-off it extended the project like cycle as writing
the code took a while.
The 555 is starting to be not very visible in
industry, either. There are
very few applications these days that are so simple - there always seems to
be some sort of microprocessor hanging around that can be in some ways
utilized - with the advantage of not needing the 555s resistors and
capacitors and all the issues they bring.
Not to mention the manufacturing spread
and slight differences between
different suppliers chips
--
Will
Dave
G4UMG
19 Apr
19 Apr
12:01 p.m.
The 555 is starting to be not very visible in
industry, either. There are
very few applications these days that are so simple - there always seems to
be some sort of microprocessor hanging around that can be in some ways
utilized - with the advantage of not needing the 555s resistors and
capacitors and all the issues they bring.
Like reliabbiltiy and repairability ;-). A metal-film resistor, used
below its ratings, will outlive any microcotnroller. And as I've said
before, I don;t ahve the problems with capacitors that some seem to.
Commerically, you want to sell new devices, That means making the old
ones hard to repair, or at least hard to repair without buying expensive
spares from you. Microcontrollers are ideal for this, you can protect the
code so that a repairer either has to buy one from you (or more likely
buy the complete PCB ;-(), or spend many hours writing his own version of
the code. If its a 555 and a few R's and C's, then anyone can fix it (if
it ever fials, which is less likely ...)
OK, soemwhat tongue-in-cheek, but only somewhat...
It's also worth rememerbign that what is sensible for a production run is
not necessarily sensible for a on-off hobbyist design. In the former case
it's worth spending longer designing it (e.g. by taking the time to
program a micorcontrollr fro the job, thus reducing the thign to one IC
and a few other compoennts), since it will simplify production. In the
latter case it can be worth using more components if it simplifies the
design or debugging stages.
Ultimately it's up to the designer. If you consider the options and
decide a microocnrolelr is what you want ot use, then fine. Go and do it.
What makes me cringe are people who come out with 'Oh, just use an
Arduino' without considerign other options, in fact without thinking
abotu the problem at all.
-tony
20 Apr
20 Apr
11:50 p.m.
On 04/17/2012 11:00 AM, David Riley wrote:
I was just as mad when management at one of our
clients forced us to
use Linux on a little embedded board where the microcontroller was
only going to be used for housekeeping; with a tiny little event loop
for an OS, we could have done the job with a 50 MHz ARM, but instead
we ended up with an 800 MHz PowerPC which caused us no end of trouble
(not least because it was a buggy chip, which is maybe a separate
issue). I like Linux, and I like PowerPCs, but they didn't belong
there.
When processor architecture becomes a "business decision", I
respectfully submit that you've got bigger problems on your hands than
just debugging the PPC system.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
17 Apr
17 Apr
1:33 p.m.
I find the dislike of the Arduino by some people in this forum a bit
silly, yet funny in a history-repeating way. The Arduino, in my
opinion, occupies roughly the same space that the Vic-20 (or ZX-81)
did back in its day. It's a great intro to the field.
There's nothing that says I like the ZX81 either... In fact I feel it did
a lot of harm to home computing over here. But that's a separae issue.
There is a big difference between a computer system and a
microcontroller. It's possible to use the former without understanding
any electronics (I didnt;' say it was desirable...). You can learn to
program without understandign what goes on inside the procesosr.
But the whole point of a microcontroller is to control things. That means
taking inputs (swithces, esnors, etc) and driving things (relays, motor
drivers, DACs, etc).
Unless yyu are only goign to use the ready-built 'sheilds' (as I believe
they are claled), you _have_ to understnad electroncis to do that. You
have to be sable to solder. The Aurduino board I saw (admittedly not an
offical one) had a few DIL-packaged through-hole ICs on it. Soldering tht
sort of thing is not a problem, or at least shouldn't be,
I realyl feel that anyoe who can design and build the necessary circuitry
to interface to their devices is not going to ahve a problem with wiring
a microcotnrolelr to a crystal.
-tony
4628
days inactive
4632
days old
17 comments
14 participants
participants (14)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
brain＠jbrain.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
dave.g4ugm＠gmail.com -
fraveydank＠gmail.com -
joachim.thiemann＠gmail.com -
jws＠jwsss.com -
keithvz＠verizon.net -
legalize＠xmission.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
mouse＠Rodents-Montreal.ORG -
rborsuk＠colourfull.com -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com