Slashdot Mirror


A 32-bit Development System For $2

An anonymous reader writes "If you are too cheap to buy a $20 Arduino or too elitist to not have at least a 32-bit processor, Dr. Dobb's shows you how to take a $2 chip, put it on a breadboard with a TTL serial (or USB) cable, and be up and running with a 32-bit C/C++ system. Even if you have to buy the breadboard and the cable, it is comparable in price to an Arduino and much more capable. The Mbed libraries (optional) make it as easy to use a 'duino, too."

138 comments

  1. No 3D printing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'll betcha I can 3D print the same CPU for 1.50$ It's the future!

    1. Re:No 3D printing? by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Funny

      Imagine a beowulf cluster of... oh, forget it.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:No 3D printing? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      That would be absolutely awesome - microchip traces are probably ~200nm, and your 3D printer nozzle might be capable of 1mm thick traces... imagine the barn you'd need to protect the finished product from the weather!

    3. Re:No 3D printing? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      A 1mm 3D printer nozzle? What is this, 2007?

    4. Re:No 3D printing? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      But seriously, no A/D? And who cannot pay the $18 or so a decent Arduino clone costs?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:No 3D printing? by wd5gnr · · Score: 1

      The chip has a quite capable A/D. And why spend $18 for an 8 bit system? Granted, I could go get an Atmel CPU (and I have) but this a 32-bit processor running at 48MHz is going to be more capable. Not sure where you got the idea there is no A/D.

    6. Re:No 3D printing? by harrkev · · Score: 1

      FYI: Atmel does have ARM processors too, along with all the usual goodies (ADC, DAC, timers, UARTs, etc.). Prices for their ARM stuff starts below $2.00 also.

      However, the one thing that Atmel does *NOT* have is a DIP package, which, IMHO, is kind of a big deal. A dip package is probably one of the best things that you can do to be hobbyist-friendly. The other things that hobbyists like are a free tool chain and a low-cost programmer. Atmel does those OK.

      Disclaimer: I work for Atmel.

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
    7. Re:No 3D printing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a poster on my wall of the Intel 4004 and right next to it the MOS 6502. The smallest wires are several mm wide and the posters are 1m and 1.5m wide respectively.

      I don't think you'd need a barn to store it, maybe a pizza box. The big problem is the massive amount of power it would consume and the ridiculous timing closure.

      The real question is why bother? I would rather have a 3D printer that could pick and place microchips from a tape.

      Incidentally, there are 3D printers capable of printing features smaller than 200nm. Dip-pen nano lithography. There are other problems, of course: material compatibility, epitaxy, dosimetry, contamination, lattice strain, etc. If the only problem to deal with was making small features, we would have 1nm devices already. There are already 1nm nanoliths fabricated with FIB, such as xray zone plates.

    8. Re:No 3D printing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh.

      I regularly use the Atmel SOIC parts, they're no big deal to hand solder, I can easily solder them onto a SOIC carrier, and it's not too difficult to wire-wrap them directly, once you glue them down to a substrate. The QFN parts are more of a pain, but are not overly difficult to solder to a carrier if you have the right kit.

      The worst parts in the world to hand solder are not the smallest, they are the TQFP packages which have no centering pad. SOICs are big enough that they are no more difficult to solder than DIPs, and QFN and BGAs are self-centering, though BGAs require contactless soldering tools. TQFPs easily skew and bridge and are absolutely terrible to work with.

      Has Atmel considered offering demo parts by the expedient mechanism of taking the QFN parts and simply batching them onto DIP carrier PCBs?

      I love Atmel tools, and have an STK500 programmer. Keep up the good work.

  2. Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So you can take a $2 microcontroller, put it on your $10 breadbord, power it with your $100 variable power supply, wire it up with your $5 eBay chi.com wires, and talk to it with your $12 FTDI adapter. SO WHAT? This isn't news. This is what ARM developers have been doing since the damn chips came out.

    1. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like those 3D printing stories that peaked last year: 3D printed gun!

      Sure, you can take your 2$ non-functional plastic blob, add a 10$ trigger, and a 50$ metal barrel, and fire mass manufactured bullets with it. So what?

    2. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you can take it on an airplane or into a school.

    3. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but I already have the breadboard, know how to wire an LM317 and resistor, and oh no not $17 how ever shall we survive?

    4. Re:Not news by jythie · · Score: 2

      I am also confused as to how this is news . It can be a cool project, but as you point out, it is something that people have been doing for quite some time. It is a nice little tutorial, but bringing making a story out of it feels a bit like someone jumping onto slashdot and going 'hey! Did you people know there is porn on the internet! I found an article about it!'

    5. Re:Not news by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      No, no, NO! You power it with a $5 piece of crap power supply that you got at an outlet sale - then watch as the power supply fries everything in sight the first time you look at it crosseyed....

      I did this in college with my "free" evaluation DSP (that cost $200 in reality...) took me a month to get another sample out of the sales rep.

    6. Re:Not news by k31 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it isn't news, but it is a very cleverly disguised advertisement. I bet they got a lot of impulse buys from this article, and that is basically what slashdot is for mostly.

    7. Re: Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how hard is it to use an old psu? those are around 15 and deliver quiet 5v and 3v3

    8. Re:Not news by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      Ah... but were they able to do it with a chip that was available in DIP form, with useful amounts of flash & ram, and relatively relaxed power & I/O design on a breadboard?

      We've gotten spoiled by $7 Arduino knock-off boards from China, and a lot of us have forgotten that just 5 years ago, Atmel literally couldn't make the ATmega644p fast enough for stores like DigiKey and Mouser to reliably keep it in stock. For those who weren't into AVR microcontrollers a few years ago, the 644p was Atmel's beefiest AVR that you could buy in DIP form. The next step up from a 644p was a 1280 or 2560 (the 2560 is used in the reference design for Android ADK), and they easily cost $30-50 (~$30 for a board that was literally just a bare chip soldered to a breakout board, $50 for one that had most of the same hardware that's the norm for an Arduino board). The 1280 and 2560 themselves were fairly cheap... I think the 1280 was around $10-12, and the 2560 was around $15. But the act of having someone solder it to a board to make it something YOU could deal with (unless you had a hot air rework station & didn't object to buying solder paste that had to be kept refrigerated, warmed to room temperature over the span of a day, and went bad a few days later when the flux separated out) basically doubled or trebled the purchase price.

      Back in the same era, it was almost UNHEARD of for people to buy breakout boards for Atmel's smaller chips, like the Mega168 (unless they were rank n00bs buying their first one), because a DIP Mega168 cost around $4, but a Mega168 soldered to a dev board with Arduino-like hardware ran about $25.Back then, the hardest problem every N00b had to solve was "how the fuck do I connect the 3x2 or 5x2 header from the AVRISP to MISO/MOSI/SCK/~RST/Vcc/Gnd on the breadboard (I used to endlessly wish somebody would make a breadboard whose pins from one side were extended by one into the middle , so you could stick a 2xN header straight into the breadboard and wire away (for some inane reason, breakout boards to convert 3x2 and 5x2 headers to breadboard-spacing were always outrageously expensive, and stayed that way until about the eBay floodgates from China opened about 2 years ago).

    9. Re:Not news by david_barreda · · Score: 1

      why you wouldn't make your own power supply?

    10. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well fuck me sideways with a rusty badger - there is pr0n on the internet. About fucking sideways. With a rusty badger.

    11. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 1280 and 2560 themselves were fairly cheap... I think the 1280 was around $10-12, and the 2560 was around $15. But the act of having someone solder it to a board to make it something YOU could deal with (unless you had a hot air rework station & didn't object to buying solder paste that had to be kept refrigerated, warmed to room temperature over the span of a day, and went bad a few days later when the flux separated out) basically doubled or trebled the purchase price.

      You don't need any of that for soldering surface mount chips to a board for a hobby project, or even prototypes in more serious situations. The only ones that have potentially serious problems are BGA chips, but there are some tricks that let you do that even with a basic soldering iron and a pcb with plated vias. You could get premade breakout boards for a couple dollars for quite a few years now, if you weren't going to make your own. It was easy enough to adapt surface mount only chips to a breadboard, as long as they weren't high enough frequency to deal with the breadboard's capacitance.

    12. Re:Not news by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      what the hell? I made my own 5V power supply when I was twelve with a bridge rectifier, a couple big-ass capacitors and a voltage regulator. it never fried anything for the next two decades.

    13. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there pr0n of Flo from Progressive using the Geico gecko as a dildo?

  3. price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're buying single quantities for development use, it doesn't make sense to worry about the price.

  4. This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You've got it! There are numerous tiny 32-bit ARM Cortex-M3 based boards out there for less than $20, which are virtually always more practical. It's not like you can't use them with a breadboard for prototyping. Teensy version 3.0 comes to mind.

    1. Re:This by Klivian · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or the TI LAUNCHPAD boards, they are Cortex-M4Fs and quite capable.

    2. Re:This by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I believe there are PIC32 MCUs that are DIP-packaged (mostly DIP-28) and cheap (a few $) at the same time. It's MIPS, not ARM, but hell, some of us like MIPS anyway.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:This by mirix · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm partial to the STM32 discovery & nucleo boards. They are cheap. Ranging from $7-15 or so depending on the model. Variants with Cortex M0, M3, M4.

      Development on STM32 can be done on entirely open source tools too, which is nice. With GCC,
      libopencm3, and
      linux st-link support.

      --
      Sent from my PDP-11
    4. Re:This by Durrik · · Score: 2

      The PIC32 MCUs are a bit more expensive. Around $4.20 for single orders. But they're also clocked higher. The PIC32MX is an 80Mhz part. The one in the ARM in the article is 48 Mhz. There is also a big difference in RAM and FLASH. The arm has 4k and 32k. The PIC32MX has 64k and 512k.

      Of course if you're really wanting to play with the MCHP parts its best to go with the starter kits, which makes them much more expensive than the $3 in the article. But then you get a USB debug port, a USB port to play with, and on some of the kits you get Ethernet as well. Which is much more than what the breadboard in the article is talking about, and you don't need a flash programmer. If you're really serious to get into embedded controllers this is probably the way to go, since you save the price of your flash programmer/debugger.

      You could always wait for the PIC32MZ as well, which is a 200 Mhz part, more RAM and more FLASH.

      --
      Software Engineer & Writer of Military Science Fiction and Fantasy Blog: petermwright.com Twitter: WrightPeterM
    5. Re:This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One thing holding me back with Microchip PIC32 starter kits is the USB debug port. Some kits from them and Digilent don't even bring out JTAG/SWD any more. Trying to lock me into their proprietary crap does not endear them to me so I never looked at them seriously.

    6. Re:This by Durrik · · Score: 1

      There is a PIC32 I/O expansion board (DM320002) that you can hook the PIC32MX starter kit to that will bring out the JTAG port to a standard header. Unfortunately that's a pricy board too that might be a bit too expensive for some people.

      But it does bring out all the pins you'd want. SPI, UART, I2C, Digital I/O etc. And if you're going to be doing some pretty intensive stuff beyond what the starter kit gives you (3 buttons, and 3 LEDs) you'd probably want to pick one of those up as well. What I like about it is it has a 9 volt input jack so I don't have to power the starter kit off my PC.

      The JTAG is left off the starter kit, since it is a starter kit, and they don't want to make it expensive. There isn't really any space on the board to put a JTAG port without expanding the area, and if you want one thing, others will want others, and yet others, and then its no longer a starter kit, but a full development kit. Which is why there's that I/O expansion board to handle the 132 pin connector that's on the bottom of the starter kit.

      --
      Software Engineer & Writer of Military Science Fiction and Fantasy Blog: petermwright.com Twitter: WrightPeterM
  5. Very cool - but where do you get the chip for $2? by mykepredko · · Score: 4, Informative

    Digi-Key $3.48 and Mouser $3.49

    Still could be something you can have a lot of fun with!

    myke

  6. Wide variety of individual chips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you are going to go with an individual chip to be put on a breadboard or a breakout board, there have been a wide variety of chips in the $2-5 range for years. And like every other step of the price ladder, there are newer, better ones each year. The chips on a lot of the dev boards, even some $100+ ones are quite cheap. What you are paying for is the convenience of someone setting up a communication layer for you and having it all soldered together in a compact design. If you are trying to save money, you always have the option of using the chip directly, although some faster, smaller ones might be more difficult to setup depending on your soldering and PCB making skills. Although some of the cheap dev boards come out to about the same cost as buying a USB communication chip and socket anyway because they are selling at a loss or using volume discounts, so it is difficult to get the exact same prices of less. But if you already have a USB to TTL cable of some sorts, you just need the main processor chip in a lot of cases. Then it is about making sure you can initially program the chip, and it is useful to have good instructions (like this article) or tutorial instead of working that out from the datasheet.

    1. Re:Wide variety of individual chips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      might be more difficult to setup depending on

      "set up". ("setup" is a noun.)

  7. Dr Dobbs by benjfowler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I used to love Dr Dobbs. But unfortunately had to give up my expensive Dr Dobb's habit, when it went online-only, and turned into a cheesy website peddling little but warmed-over stuff from elsewhere, and paid puffery. Too bad.

  8. Micromite by psergiu · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's a better one-chip sollution:

    MicroMite.

    PIC32 running a full BASIC interperter (ANSI X3.113-1987, with optional line numbers, structured programming features like do loops, multiline if statements, user defined subroutines and functions. )

    You don't even need to install Arduino or another IDE to use-it - you just need a VT100 terminal emulator and use the built-in editor.

    --
    1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
  9. Digikey is expensive by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Digi-Key $3.48 and Mouser $3.49

    Digikey and Mouser are about the most expensive places to go. They have everything and usually don't have minimum buys but the markups are huge. Arrow Electronics has them for $1.70. My company buys a lot of stuff through Heilind.

    If you want to find out who has parts and how much, stocknet is a good resource.

    1. Re:Digikey is expensive by janoc · · Score: 2

      Good luck trying to get these in Europe. They are pretty much unobtanium, because nobody stocks them or they sell these only to companies (Farnell), with a huge shipping and handling markup (Digikey, Mouser, Farnell) or they simply don't carry the DIP version at all (RadioSpares).

      It is way easier to buy one of the QFP packages - they are both cheaper, more available and with more pins. And either get it pre-soldered on a breakout board or buy a simple QFP to DIP adapter on eBay (or make your own).

    2. Re:Digikey is expensive by Kazymyr · · Score: 1

      Arrow Electronics kills you with shipping charges. Least expensive option is $15 for a small order.

      --
      I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
    3. Re:Digikey is expensive by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Good luck trying to get these in Europe.

      It is really too bad that governments don't get together and set up an international small parcel delivery service that anyone can use easily and conveniently by applying a small adhesive sticker (or "stamp") as their proof of payment.

    4. Re:Digikey is expensive by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      LOL, if you think Digikey and Mouser are expensive, check the prices (including shipping) from Newark or Farnell. Jesus God naked on a Harley, Newark absolutely *rapes* you on the shipping charges. I can't even count the number of times I *almost* bought something from Newark, then called it off once they revealed their criminally-expensive shipping charges at checkout time.

      DigiKey's shipping is expensive, but they have a huge advantage -- if you absolutely MUST have something tomorrow, their cutoff time for next-day delivery is something like 10pm most nights, and they'll happily ship via USPS Overnight so you can order on Friday night or Saturday and get your part by Saturday or Sunday.

      Mouser's shipping isn't *cheap*, but their rates for Priority Mail are relatively reasonable & they don't have a minimum order amount like DigiKey does.

      I still have occasional fantasies about Radio Shack closing MOST of their retail stores, but keeping at least one store per metro area open that's well-stocked with just about any component hobbyists might want to buy (say, everything that SparkFun and AdaFruit sells). Back in the 80s (when Radio Shack's parts department occupied the rear third of the store), people paid INSANE prices for components because you could walk in, grab what you needed, and go home with it in hand.

    5. Re:Digikey is expensive by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Before making snide comments, you should try to get those items in Europe. I have. By the time you have them in your hands, you can rest assured that the price is closer to 200-250% of what the parts originally costed. Provided your time is free, of course. Else it gets a tad bit expensive.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Digikey is expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use something like octopart that will search multiple sellers for parts. Mouser and Digikey are often the cheapest place to get things depending on what types of projects and parts you're looking at. Sometimes you can get lucky with smaller sellers having what you need if you are looking for specific parts, and you can get really cheap deals on eBay if you don't mind the long international shipping times. But sometimes the price differences are so small it doesn't matter where you go, and it is best to just pick some place that has everything you need and service you like.

    7. Re:Digikey is expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like someone who never had to deal with the Digikey export inquisition.

    8. Re:Digikey is expensive by sjbe · · Score: 1

      LOL, if you think Digikey and Mouser are expensive, check the prices (including shipping) from Newark or Farnell.

      We order the majority of the small parts we buy through Heilind. They have a warehouse close to us which allows us to get stuff delivered next day using Fedex Ground. (We use a lot of Tyco and Molex stuff) You can cut the freight charges down a bit by having them ship on your Fedex/UPS account. Makes it harder for them to artificially jack up the freight. That's what most companies that buy electronic components do including mine. Also if you buy a fair bit of stuff and need just one or two pieces many distributors will send samples to you for just the cost of freight.

      I've ordered from pretty much every electronics distributor of significance you can think of. Some are easier to work with than others.

    9. Re:Digikey is expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Good luck trying to get these in Europe. They are pretty much unobtanium,

      Well, or maybe you just suck at finding suppliers.

      http://www.segor.de/#Q%3DLPC11...

  10. While I'm off RTFA... by RailGunner · · Score: 1

    ... can anyone elaborate as to why this would be a better road than just springing for a Raspberry Pi?

    1. Re:While I'm off RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cheaper. Better for driving devices (Pi is greatas a mini Unix but if you are serious about using the GPIO you want to be careful not to fry it).

      Honestly though, see this for a homebrew Arduino compatible solution at a fraction on the price: http://shrimping.it/blog/shrim...

      Buy the bits from wherever and follow the plans or they will sell you a kit.

    2. Re:While I'm off RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Full documentation, including on-chip peripherals.
      Proper electrical and timing specs.
      Doesn't require a SD card to boot.
      Lower power.
      Can do hard realtime (the ARM in the pi not only has to deal with the usual DRAM controller latencies, it can get stalled for north of 10ms by videocore bus accesses...).

      Microcontrollers and general purpose computers are different things and - surprise - designed to do different things well.

    3. Re:While I'm off RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two different things The PI can run an OS has video etc A $2 chip runs natively you code generally for one specific job thats it.This is a controller the PI is a computer.

    4. Re:While I'm off RTFA... by WhiteZook · · Score: 1

      Add shipping cost, power supply, breadboard, interface cables, and the difference in price is negligible.

    5. Re:While I'm off RTFA... by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Informative

      Google the difference between a microcontroller (this, Arduinos, etc) and microprocessor (RaspberryPi). They both have their advantages and disadvantages and areas that they are designed for.

    6. Re: While I'm off RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many of which are one off costs. If you need 10 smart motor controllers, you can spend $200 on Teensy 3s, or $30 on the infrastructure and $30 on chips and a few parts. Different people with different projects have different trade-offs.

    7. Re: While I'm off RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the first and chief point is that the Pi sucks for anything resembling RT control. Which is why people buy a Pi "for the IO!" And then hook it up to an Arduino (or teensy ... or $3 LPC) to run a string of NeoPixels because the Pi can't do precision timing.

    8. Re: While I'm off RTFA... by tibit · · Score: 1

      Huh? Pi can do great precision timing, you just have to run it as a bare-metal system.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  11. Teensy 3.1 is cooler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I dig that the chip in TFA is DIP...but soldering TQFP isn't that tough... same cost, much more power in the Teensy 3.1. Also less of a hack than what's described in the article.

    1. Re:Teensy 3.1 is cooler by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      It's not so much "tough" as "the goddamn solder paste has to be kept refrigerated until you're ready to use it, then goes bad within a few days of warming it up to room temperature". Throwing away mostly-full syringe after syringe of solder paste after you used maybe 0.5mL of it to solder one chip gets expensive after a while.

    2. Re: Teensy 3.1 is cooler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the cost is one-off. You can keep paying $20 for each teensy (and I love the teensy!) or you can pay $20 for the infrastructure once, and then $3 per chip. And if you only need 6 IO pins, the LPC810 is even cheaper.

    3. Re:Teensy 3.1 is cooler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, then don't use solder paste. TQFP is rather easy to solder with regular 60/40 solder or even cheap lead free stuff. I have a steady enough hand to just dab each pin with a chisel tipped soldering iron, but others have techniques using copper wick that work quite well too.

    4. Re:Teensy 3.1 is cooler by WhiteZook · · Score: 1

      I use my solder paste straight out of the refrigerator. I actually prefer the firmer consistency that way. It easily lasts 6 months in there.

    5. Re:Teensy 3.1 is cooler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err, why use solder paste for *QFP and friends for one-offs?
      Tin pads. Clean. Apply generous amounts of flux. Place chip. Reflow or tack and drag solder.
      Same procedure works for QFNs and friends once you have a feel for how much solder to put on the center pad.
      As for solder paste... For stencil printing I'm using a can of paste that expired 5 years ago. Whenever it gets too thick I add a bunch of 99% isopropyl and stir thoroughly.

    6. Re:Teensy 3.1 is cooler by tibit · · Score: 1

      Heck, I don't even know who would need solder paste without actually using a laser-cut stencil and, you know, actually printing the paste like it was meant to be - in quantity? What's the point? You don't even need or want a fine-tipped soldering iron. For reflowing anything with leads, you in fact want a nice 3mm-5mm wide, short tip with good thermal conductivity. You don't need solder paste, you do need a flux pen .

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  12. I for one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    look forward to buying one, playing with it for a day, then throwing it in a drawer, never to be seen until I move.

  13. Re:Very cool - but where do you get the chip for $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You buy 149 from Digi-Key and scam Mouser into accepting all but one as a return. Duh!

  14. Re:This is more than $2!!! by aliquis · · Score: 1

    I can do it for $0.

    My PC support 32 bit instructions.

  15. Dr. Dobb's excellent content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Huh? Have you actually looked at it in the last few years?

    This quarter, Walter Bright on writing languages, Dave Thomas (the Ruby guy) on why he regrets being one of the original signers of the the Agile Manifesto, Cay Horstmann's lengthy tutorial on Java 8 lambdas, Microsoft's compiler team on the most underused compiler switches for Visual C++. In addition, Jolt Awards, salary survey, and editorials that aren't shy, like this week's on companies using OSS without buying licenses. I read and love Dr. Dobb's and don't in anyway recognize what you're talking about.

    1. Re: Dr. Dobb's excellent content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. I love how dobb covers a huge range of topic not just one or two things

  16. Raspberry Pi as headless Linux box ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

    ... can anyone elaborate as to why this would be a better road than just springing for a Raspberry Pi?

    I have some old systems in the closet running as headless Linux boxes. I recently realized some of those were about the same CPU and RAM -wise as a Raspberry Pi B I had on my desk for a current project. The Pi was about US$45 with case and power. I'm thinking of attaching an external USB HD and mounting a NAS HD for some comparison test to these old systems. Don't need blazing performance for the local subversion or media wiki server in the closet, might save space and watts and decibels with the Pi. Should be a fun experiment.

    1. Re:Raspberry Pi as headless Linux box ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would make a great learning project. I'm sure it would save quite a bit of power too. The Pi would use about 10W tops, add in a small router or wireless, and you are still below 40W or so, much less than the old PCs would draw.

    2. Re:Raspberry Pi as headless Linux box ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remember to get a good USB hub. I've had a lot of headaches with USB devices drawing too much current on my Pi and kicking it offline.

    3. Re:Raspberry Pi as headless Linux box ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have a Pi running raspbian playing NAS.
      Works pretty well, not exactly a speed demon, about 10MB/s read and 8MB/s write for NFS.

      For comparison, my "big" NAS here:
      Xeon E3-1220Lv2 on a Supermicro X9SCM-iiF board, IBM M1015 SAS HBA flashed to LSI 9211-8i, Mellanox MHGH29-XTC Infiniband HCA, 10 3TB 7.2k SATA HDs, linux md raid6, 65W at the wall.
      113MB/s read 110MB/s write for NFS over the onboard GbE.
      1200MB/s read 850MB/s write for NFSv3 over IPoIB. NFSoRDMA would have been even faster but had weird issues with client lockups.

      Conclusion: for its cost/power the Pi is surprisingly good. Just don't expect miracles.

  17. breadboard alone is $30 by paulpach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The cheapest breadboard I could find was $30.

    In other news, I also figured out how to get a great ride for $1. All you need to do is add a $1 car freshener to your existing BMW.

    1. Re:breadboard alone is $30 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    2. Re:breadboard alone is $30 by Ksevio · · Score: 2

      How hard did you look? I just typed "breadboard" into google and found several under $10 on the first page. Also found some great surfaces for cutting bread at a similar affordable price.

    3. Re:breadboard alone is $30 by paulpach · · Score: 1

      Not hard at all, as the price was irrelevant.

      My point was that it is only $2 if you _only_ focus on the chip which is absurd.

    4. Re:breadboard alone is $30 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is a site for nerds. You are expected to already own several breadboards.

    5. Re: breadboard alone is $30 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lern2ebay

      $11 for breadboard and 170 pc jumper wire pack.

  18. Penny wise, pound foolish? by bhlowe · · Score: 3, Informative

    Spending a little more money up front often pays off with a better product, bigger user community, more sample code, more documentation... and no breadboarding!

    1. Re: Penny wise, pound foolish? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but I want a breadboard to experiment and not be tied to a board to deploy.

    2. Re: Penny wise, pound foolish? by MacTO · · Score: 0

      You can still do that with Arduino boards. The ATmega is socketed on the Uno, so you can pop it out and place it on your own board when it is time to deploy. In the case of surface mount chips, you can still use the Arduino when prototyping and program the chip on your own board when it comes time to deploy.

      The benefits are tremendous. You have a standard platform for prototyping and most of the debugging. Since there is nothing "magical" about the Arduino (e.g. expensive supporting circuitry or proprietary libraries that are difficult to incorporate outside of the standard development tools), it is also easy to build compact and inexpensive circuits when it comes time to deploy.

  19. PIC by Richy_T · · Score: 2

    If you sign up with Microchip as a dev, they'll send you small numbers of their chips for free. These can be set up to work with next to zero external components. You will need some kind of programmer though.

    1. Re:PIC by n1ywb · · Score: 1

      Yeah you could shoot yourself in the foot and use PICs or you could come to the light of AVR with it's higher speed and full support for doing dev with the GNU toolchain on Linux from 8 to 32 bits.

      --
      -73, de n1ywb
      www.n1ywb.com
    2. Re:PIC by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

      And what about file system crashes (ie from power being pulled) in an embedded environment?

    3. Re:PIC by Matt_Bennett · · Score: 2

      Higher speed? The max speed on a 32 bit AVR is 66MHz, with 1.5 DMIP/MHz, the max speed on a PIC32MX is 80MHz at 1.65 DMIP/MHz. You can do development on Windows, Mac or Linux with MPLABX for every 8, 16, and 32MHz PIC in Microchip's stable. Microchip's 16 and 32 bit compilers are GCC based (but free versions are limited to -O1 optimization). The newest PIC32, the MZ, will do up to 200MHz.

      If you prefer using AVR, great, but at least make your comparisons based on reality. The hard part of doing any development is not the core you're working on, but the code you put into it.

    4. Re:PIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Seems pretty obvious he was talking about 8 bit AVR & PIC.

      All these outfits can take their free, but limited compilers and shove them so deep up their ass it hurts.

    5. Re:PIC by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The 32 bit PIC architecture isn't bad at all, but it is badly let down by the development tools. MPLAB X is okay, but really nothing special. Microchip's ICD hardware is awful, and rather expensive.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:PIC by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Meh, if the speed is fast enough (sometimes it's more about the timing) and I'm hitting assembly anyway and I'm not religious about the toolchain I use, who cares?

    7. Re:PIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      32-bit PICs use a MIPS32 core. You can use any MIPS32 gcc cross compiler with full optimization. You only need PIC-friendly versions if you buy into their dev tools.

    8. Re: PIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you arduino fan boy. 8 bits and a retard build system

    9. Re:PIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, if the speed is fast enough (sometimes it's more about the timing) and I'm hitting assembly anyway and I'm not religious about the toolchain I use, who cares?

      Agreed. I have no idea what they are talking about. All embedded SOICs or even most SOCs are system specific. And you end up writing like 200(0) lines of code anyway, to do some timing, I/O detection, ADC or similar.

      I have no idea what is the appeal of Ardino over something like PIC or similar SOC. People don't have basic knowledge of hardware or can't/won't read free specs?

    10. Re:PIC by Matt_Bennett · · Score: 1

      Microchip's ICD is awful? Well, it isn't JTAG (for most chips, but the PIC32 does support JTAG debugging), but the ICD hardware supports all PICs (8, 16, 32 bit) and is available at what appears to be competitive to Atmel's tools (Atmel as an example- their low-end programmer the AVRISP is about the same price at Digikey as the PICKIT3) You can spend more and get more capability no matter what. It seems to me that the debugger that people complain about the most is the one they use the most, no matter the architecture. An ICD is not an ICE- and it doesn't seem like a true ICE exists anymore since nobody was willing to pay the huge price for the development system- ICDs pretty much rely on hardware in the part itself. The cheap generic JTAG debuggers at sparkfun don't get stellar reviews. My experience is that debuggers are a lot like Camaros- everybody has one, and all of them are limited by the person in control.

    11. Re:PIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you still have a computer around with a decent serial port and are going to use a breadboard anyway, you can assemble a programmer with ~3 transistors, less than a dozen other components (diodes, resistors and caps).

    12. Re:PIC by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      I got to play with the ICE. It didn't offer a huge benefit over the development model we were using and it had timing issues that messed with our very timing sensitive application. Nice idea though.

    13. Re:PIC by AlabamaCajun · · Score: 1

      I've been tinkering with the PICs since 2002 before that it was the ELF2 Cosmac 1802 and the intel 8085 explorer 85.
      Yes the PICs are my chip of choice and can get them for a buck or s free sample from Microchip when I feel the need to get something freshly minted. I just finished a scrumptious salad grown in a hydroponics system run by a PIC 16F629 and a few components. Olimex programer works great except when you put the chip in backwards. (Guess what it still works after that torture test, I don't know if the Atmels are that hardy).
      It's still worth it to get the Raspberry PI, Arduino or Chipkit for the fun and up and running environment that's ready out the box and you support the development teams that bring these systems to a level more people can access without touching a soldering iron (just the handle, not the tip tsssssssssss).

    14. Re:PIC by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      There was something weird about mplab X which made me download the previous version. I can't remember what it was now but I seem to recall it was a "hell no" moment during installation.

  20. Re:Not news - but very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... people have been doing for quite some time. It is a nice little tutorial, but bringing making a story out of it feels a bit like someone jumping onto slashdot and going 'hey! Did you people know...'

    For some of us that's quite useful - as a HS student I hacked hardware back in the days when semiconductors came one gate to a package (I recall the first $1 transistor, the CK-722, I could now afford one!) Having become a mathematician, I didn't know how powerful/cheap ARM chips had become. There is value in spreading information outside one's field of expertise. (You would not believe the number of things I see that are mathematically/algorithmically stupid.)

  21. DR Dobbs is educated stupid. by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    32 bits x (dollar / 8 bits) = 4 dollar

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  22. Re:Very cool - but where do you get the chip for $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple, buy it in bunchs of 100 or more.

  23. Re:Very cool - but where do you get the chip for $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Even the website says $3 for the chip. It's £1.50 from avnet. Extremely optimistic summary. To quote TFA...

    Assuming you already have a breadboard and a few simple items, you can start using these CPUs with very little effort. Even if you have to buy everything, you could spend as little as $20 — perhaps $40 if you buy the Link board for debugging. The result, though, is an easy to work with 32-bit development system that can create systems that are very inexpensive to deploy.

    Perhaps a zero slipped? You need to buy the carrier PCB (probably $3-5 from Oshpark), breadboard ($1-2 on eBay), wires and a USB-Serial cable. I don't know anyone who just has a serial converter just lying around unless they're an engineer - nobody except electrical engineers and instrument scientists use serial ports any more.

    http://octopart.com/partsearch#!?q=LPC1114FN28

  24. See Beetle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ad Slashdot served me up for this article is a $7 Arduino Leonardo board called "Beetle."
    No breadboard required, and includes a usb port. It's about the size of a coin.

  25. Re:K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Seriously - do you even English, bro?

    Take your meds, I promise the voices will stop.

  26. $4 PSOC 4 kits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.cypress.com/?rID=92146
    (get the 4200)
    I just bought a few of these. max 48mhz cortex M0, 32 bit. 4k sram 32kb flash
    programmable analog and digital blocks
    and they come with the usb uart already

    1. Re: $4 PSOC 4 kits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This kit requires PSOC Creator"...

      Any idea how friendly it is to open tool chains?

    2. Re: $4 PSOC 4 kits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its using gcc internally, but the software is windows only. i wasn't able to get it going in wine.
      bootloader code is open, chip is programmable with SWD, TRM is available
      so a linux gcc setup and programmer is probably possible but uncharted territory for now

  27. Africans breathe a sigh of relief... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... at LAST they can finally start developing! You see, those damn 'racists' were somehow holding them back, and preventing an entire continent from producing this...

    What good has ever come out of Africa? What have Africans EVER invented?

  28. Re:Very cool - but where do you get the chip for $ by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    LOL.

    Thanx for the tip.

    I think I'll buy a Corvette that way.

    myke

  29. Your math is wrong! by dskoll · · Score: 4, Funny

    $2 is only 16 bits, since a quarter is 2 bits...

  30. The article contradicts the headline by jklovanc · · Score: 1

    Assuming you already have a breadboard and a few simple items, you can start using these CPUs with very little effort. Even if you have to buy everything, you could spend as little as $20 — perhaps $40 if you buy the Link board for debugging.

    An arduino has many more connectors and is easier to use and therefore justifies a higher cost.

    1. Re:The article contradicts the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arduino doesn't have more connectors, at least not a "normal" one. Easier to use? Have you tried Mbed? It is drop dead easy unless you only know what a sketch is and need someone to write a 3 line main for you.

  31. 32 bit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    haven't seen a 32 bit processor since the Pentium 4/Windows XP days. Just saying.

  32. Re:Dr. Dobb's excellent content by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Wow, that makes me want to subscribe.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  33. OMPC by tomhath · · Score: 1

    One Microcontroller Per Child. At $2 a pop they could give one to every kid in the world.

  34. Yeah Mr NSA $hill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    whatever you say.

  35. USB2TTL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...costs something like 5 Euros. get it at Reichelt.de.

    1. Re:USB2TTL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but if you are dealing with a cheaper dev board as suggested, that still adds up. I've seen a few that were in the $20 range for a pre-made board, where the main processor (or FPGA in some cases) was on the order of $10 for a single chip order, the USB communication chip was about $5 or so, throw in a socket, a few regulator chips or external clock, and you start getting close to the $20 without factoring in the cost of the PCB. You can sometimes save some money with a cheaper USB chip or cable and making other setup changes, although then need to design your own board and code instead of using the free stuff you can find for the dev boards sometimes. You end up trading a lot of work for a couple dollars, which, unless you like to play with the setup or want the educational experience, is not worth it for most who just want to get to use that as a means to some other end.

  36. Re:Very cool - but where do you get the chip for $ by JanneM · · Score: 1

    "I don't know anyone who just has a serial converter just lying around unless they're an engineer"

    This is not a first project for anybody. Chances are high that you've already played with Arduino a fair bit, and built your own on breadboard as well. In which case you most likely have a USB-serial cable or board already, in order to program them.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  37. Oh Really, Mr $hill ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who is paying you ? www.keil.com ?

    GCC is "good enough" to compile the Linux kernel, Android, firefox and almost all free software. By my assessment, it is an excellent piece of software.

    1. Re:Oh Really, Mr $hill ? by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      I think he was dissing MPLab and similar, not GCC.

      I've used GCC a fair bit and they get quite a lot of kudos from me. I'm not religious about it though.

  38. Not long ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...embedded development cost an arm and a leg. Arduino and RPI changed this massively. Tell this to your paymasters at the PIC Headquarters.

    1. Re:Not long ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Long before Arduino and RPI, there were embedded hardware solutions for $2-4. Those parts are still around, although have gotten either cheaper or faster with time along with everything else. The difference is not price and "arm and leg costs" but, initially, a small trade off in convenience for a pre-assembled setup, in a compact form factor. But if you wanted to spend even less than $10-20, you could buy a couple dollar microcontroller, build a programmer out of a dozen discrete components costing less than a dollar total on the same breadboard you were going to tinker on anyway. There was plenty of open source software for running on the chips, for programmer communication, and for compiling even. About the one thing that has changed now is that some systems like Arduino, have gained enough momentum to have a very wide range of available hardware and software that just plug together, which just saves you the time of having to read spec sheets to make two different chips communicate together.

    2. Re:Not long ago by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. I'm certainly not dissing the Arduino and I'm starting to play with some Raspberry Pi stuff myself.

      As you say, programming PICs can be done on the cheap but even their ICD stuff was not that expensive (I'm currently using the rip-off Inchworm at home though).

  39. And You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...are a jealous $hill from the competition. You bite your own a$$ because you have tried to sell $600 dev boards for your $3 microcontrollers. And $5000 tool chains.

    Arduino changed the game by using excellent free compilers and a cheap board to bring microcontrollers to the masses. You can now do development using a self-made parallel port programmer and a $5 chip from Atmel. Plus gcc and avrdude, of course. Which are FREE.

    1. Re:And You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like a true fan boy. There are plenty of good free and cheap options that aren't crippled like Arduino. I wonder who is the shill here? Oh yeah, its you.

  40. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The WHOLE FUCKING POINT of microcontroller tinkering is to build something yourself. So why can't you buy that $5 USB2Parallel thing and solder it to your self-made board ? Looks ugly ? Are you hipster ? Then stick with Ruby on Rails or something.

    Building something YOURSELF will hone your skills. Many people are still challenged with the soldering iron. The more you do it, the better you get. Laziness is a vice.

    1. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why are you buying a microcontroller then? Plenty of hobbyists have built their own processor out of TTL logic chips for education and fun, there are even some who have built a processor out of discrete transistors, or 555 timer chips. If the whole point is to build stuff your sell and learn how it works in detail, why are you buying a microcontroller? Why are you even buying a $5 cable too? There have been projects that use a small microcontroller as a communication adapter between USB and serial or parallel, so it is quite within the realm of building that too,

      Or maybe because the point of tinkering isn't to build everything yourself, but to build something and different people have interest in building different things, some with different goals. I had to wire-wrap my own processor from discrete gates in school, and after the first couple microcontroller projects had a pretty good idea how they worked and use them regularly at my job. I continued to build such projects from scratch because they would save me a lot of money, but that changed a couple years ago as more complete, accessible systems were available for dirt cheap, cheaper than I could get the parts for myself. I no longer tinker with microcontrollers because I want to learn more about simple building blocks of electronics that I've gotten a solid handle on, I build such projects as a means to an end. I tinker because I want to have an upgraded CNC router, or to upgrade communications and features to some RC toys, or because I'm trying out some programmable kitchen gadget I had an idea for.

      There are a bazillion reasons people tinker, sometimes it is just to save money on certain steps so they can get to what they really want to do. Plenty of people have little to no interest in the microcontroller part of the project, but still need it for their larger goal. Others realize after the second or third project using one, the basics are pretty straightforward and it comes down to just writing the code you want and designing the interface between GPIO and what you want to control.

  41. Conclusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Cessna is surprisingly good for its money, I just love to fly F16 on my main job. Haahahha, how I can outrun those little Cessnas with my F16 !!!!!!

    Plus, who the fuck cares about the energy bill for my F16. I have millions of idiots who will pay for that.

  42. Been there done that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depending on the store, those LPC1114FN28 can be had around 1€ each. You can also request to sample them, then you'd get a tube of 10 for free.
    Though, for programming I use a $4 USB to TTL serial adapter from a noname vendor on ebay. That was $4 including shipping.

    Codesourcery toolchain works ok, or any other arm-none-eabi toolchain. Programming is straightforward with lpc21isp; just reset the chip with on pin pulled low and specify the USB-TTL serial port to the tool and it'll upload new firmware using the integrated serial bootloader. Bootloader is also very robust in the sense that you reprogram MCU clocks in software, as opposed to programming fuses on AVR/PIC. So you can't mess up the clock system so that it wouldn't boot anymore.

    It's amazing to have a DIP-cased 32-bit MCU that can be programmed via serial port, but that's about it. Downsides include limited memory space (32kB FLASH and 4kB RAM) and that the FLASH on Cortex-M0 is severely lacking in speed. M3/M4 CPUs have wider FLASH arrays with prefetching caches. Cortex-M0 has zilch. So if you want to go over 20MHz, you need to add waitstates.

  43. Is like an AppleII with 32 bits. Add BASIC and Fly by juanjosmail · · Score: 1

    Neat!. like 8b days with 32. some old ARM BBC BASIC interpreter and push code trough serial line?

  44. Re:Is like an AppleII with 32 bits. Add BASIC and by metaforest · · Score: 1

    This is exactly what I do with with an Olimex PIC32 T-795H. It breaks the PIC32 IO out to breadboard compatible pins, and comes with an open source version of MMBASIC installed. It is easy to upgrade it to one of the later closed versions of MMBASIC that is more VB-like, and has better performance. Performance is not too bad, it processes about 1 BASIC token per microsecond. MMBASIC even supports treating the unused portion (192K) of FLASH as a file system, and can do autostart to a BASIC app, and it supports app chaining. You can literally plug this thing into a breadboard, plug it into a usb port, open a VT100 terminal and start writing code. On a Mac, you can use screen, but you'll need to modify the function key mappings to get the VT100 function keys the MMBASIC editor supports to work correctly. 32 bit 80MHz BASIC machine that is ready to rock.

  45. Re:Is like an AppleII with 32 bits. Add BASIC and by juanjosmail · · Score: 1

    Nice.... That way you can push external "live code" to the controller. I guess the speed issue can be optimized at parts needed if your BASIC interpreter allows assembly embbeding. Given this thing. Ideal programming machine would be a Raspberry Pi. :-) Vt100 compatible. And cheaper than Apple Machines. On Raspberry Pi do love Real Time Basic-Assembler integration of RISCOS Operative System, that is a very efficent colaborative multitasking ARM ASM + BASIC environment for the ARM Systems, back from the Archimedes Days. I Was thinking that something similar to RISCOS but suited for ARM microcontrolers instead full SOC complete systems as PI, would be so neat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

  46. Re:Is like an AppleII with 32 bits. Add BASIC and by metaforest · · Score: 1

    RPi is an excellent machine, but the GPIO cannot handle realtime apps. What it really needs is a realtime I/O controller. Maybe something like an XMOS controller and an FPGA.