[ARDUINO]

Thu Mar 21 12:34:37 CDT 2013

I’m not sure exactly how to respond (and thanks Andre for mentioning me in the same sentence as Alberto), but I think both Alberto and Rob have good points.

Alberto is going EXACTLY where I want to go.  And, he is very correct in that the Arduinos don’t have enough power to do anything of much significance.  I’ve already tried to push an Uno beyond its RAM , program, and data EEPROM, and am constantly fight the lack of usable pins.  This is doing some fairly basic stuff, not anything near SDR type apps.  So, I definitely want to follow what Alberto is doing.

However, you have to start somewhere.  As Rob points out, it is very easy to get an Arduino board up and running.  You can blink lights in less than a minute after installing the IDE.  I’ve been VERY IMPRESSED with the libraries and hardware shields that are available to do so many things with an Arduino.  From creating an X10 controller, motor shields, lCD and TFT/Touch LCDs, etc.. the Arduino has lots of pre-written fun stuff.  Just don’t try to do too much at once.

I’ve tried to build a nice X10 home controller for example.  While I can drive the X10 module, or a nice LCD, or a nice keyboard, trying to do all that with a Uno is very difficult to say the least.  This project is NOT sophisticated, an 8080 or Z80 microcomputer-based board could to it.  But, the Uno has too few hardware pins, and not enough EEPROM storage for the LUT, so I plan to use a Mega 2560.

Some hams in the Austin QRP group has been playing with the STM32F4 Discovery board.  It is more sophisticated, and would probably be better to use.  I have two of them.  However, there was a discussion about how difficult the development tools were to install and master.  The hardware platform is not as easy to expand upon, only a couple of mother/daughter boards are available.  But, if you need the horsepower, you need it.

BTW, the best Wifi shield that I have found for the Arduino is the Sparkfun WiFly, or other ones based on the Roving Networks modules.  I would recommend that you avoid the Link Sprite Cu Head (copperhead), or other modules based on the Microhip RF modules that the snake ones use.  They do NOT have the TCP/UDP/IP stack implemented within the wifi module.  You need to put significant software inside you project on the Arduino to do the protocol stack, taking up valuable memory and CPU time.  Be very careful what wifi hardware you get.  It can bite you.

I’m sorry, but I don’t believe that you should use tools that are only “good enough”.  You can get frustrated by always having to upgrade your hardware, and MORE importantly, the IDE and your software knowledge.  I think this is partially where Alberto was going.  The Arduino is a great learning tool, but simply cannot fulfill all requirements.  You will ALL reach its limitations if you keep building more complicated projects.

Lastly, I may not be around much in the next little while.  We just lost our boy cat, Fluffy.  He was only five years old, but he gave so much love to Judy and I.  He was more like a dog, as he was always happy and loving.  He was born with a lot of challenges (diabetes, Irritable Bowel, bad allergies, to name a few), but he never let them impede his life.  He was like a little boy to us.  We still have his sister cat, who is trying to figure out where in the house Fluffy is.  We miss him, our house feels so empty.
73, Terry, WB4JFI

From: Karl W4KRL 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 12:57 PM
To: tacos at amrad.org 
Cc: 'Alberto di Bene' ; 'Rob Seastrom' 
Subject: [ARDUINO]

Rob,

I second your opinion. Good engineering uses only the resources that are needed for the worst case solution to the problem. There are many design challenges that can only be met with processors more powerful than the Arduino. On the other hand, the Arduino is beautifully suited to most ham projects that will actually get designed and built. You can buy the Arduino starter kit at Radio Shack today over lunch today and have it running in a few minutes. That is not yet true for most of the “better” XYZ brands. Note the comparison between the Arduino and the Apollo 11 Guidance Computer. The Arduino runs rings around it so it would be more than sufficient to land a man on the moon and return him safely to earth. (Supposing we had a big enough rocket, of course.) 

I’m not advocating that we keep things primitive, but I think that using the easiest platform to buy, learn, program, and interface will be more likely to spark greater interest among a larger community of hams. 

In general, we should not criticize the design approaches taken by other hams. Paul, W4RI, says it better than I could in his “Rule of Amateur Radio Progress”.

“Progress is made in Amateur Radio by letting energetic individuals move forward. Conversely, nothing in Amateur Radio is accomplished by complaining about other individual's projects. Simple summary: If you don't like their project, then go do or support your own choices.”

http://www.k0nr.com/blog/2008/01/paul-rinaldos-rule-of-amateur-radio.html

73 Karl W4KRL

     Apollo 11
     Arduino UNO

      Clock
     1.024
     16
     MHz

      RAM
     2
     32 + 2
     KB

      ROM
     32
     1
     KB

      Word
     16
     8
     bits

      Power
     55
     1.2
     W

      Weight
     32
     0.07
     kg

      App. Lang.
     assembly
     C++

      Famous Error codes
     404 & 1202
     compiler complaints

      Display 
     relay driven 7-segment EL
     240x320 TFT LCD

      Input
     19 buttons
     resistive touch screen

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Seastrom [mailto:rs at seastrom.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:00 AM
To: Alberto di Bene
Cc: tacos at amrad.org
Subject: Re: arduino

With all due respect to the folks who say "$PLATFORM is better than Arduino, you should skip the arduino and buy X or Y", you're rather missing the point.

I've had encounters with a few embedded microcontrollers and SOCs.  If you don't know what you're doing, getting JTAG, ISP, or however they want to be programmed up and running is non-trivial.  Good luck on non-Windows platforms, and a lot of the time the dev kit is spendy too.

The thing that the Arduino has going for it above all is that it's pretty plug-and-chug; getting to "Hello World" is a 5 minute operation, and it's something that a bright 10 year old can do without help (I've seen it firsthand).

There are plenty of libraries to do a lot of useful stuff, making it fairly accessible.  Again, well within the grasp of bright and so-inclined preteens.

A lot of applications don't need the higher end stuff, particularly stuff that's quick and dirty or decorative.  A friend of mine who does embedded stuff for a living grabbed an Arduino a couple of years ago to drive the blinkenlights on his son's robot costume for Halloween.

In other words, the Arduino, while limited, is highly useful for its intended entry level application.  Having the discussion turn into an enumeration of our favorite platforms that are more capable in some way or another is a bit of a distraction and smacks of editor or OS wars.

my $0.02

-r

_______________________________________________

Tacos mailing list

Tacos at amrad.org

https://amrad.org/mailman/listinfo/tacos

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Tacos mailing list
Tacos at amrad.org
https://amrad.org/mailman/listinfo/tacos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://amrad.org/pipermail/tacos/attachments/20130321/4dc8f18a/attachment-0001.html>