Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #46348 > unrolled thread
| Started by | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-30 21:39 -0400 |
| Last post | 2016-03-31 23:23 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 119 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 21:39 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-30 18:52 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-03-30 20:31 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-03-30 23:41 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-31 00:37 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 14:36 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-04-01 00:42 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 13:09 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-04-01 23:43 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-04-01 17:28 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-04-02 12:10 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-31 17:07 -0500
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-03-31 23:59 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-04-01 00:52 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2016-04-01 12:47 -0500
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-03-31 18:54 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 22:08 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-03-31 19:36 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 23:28 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-03-31 22:32 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 02:39 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 04:42 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick josv@planet.nl - 2016-04-01 04:48 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 05:50 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-04-01 13:35 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 13:11 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 01:58 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 10:15 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 08:02 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 12:39 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 12:54 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-02 15:14 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 22:14 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-02 23:08 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 02:11 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-03 22:54 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 02:50 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 16:37 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 23:15 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 02:21 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 00:01 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 03:17 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 01:15 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 12:50 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-04 23:21 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 02:29 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 00:02 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-05 02:07 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 13:12 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 00:12 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 03:22 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 01:22 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-05 02:12 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 13:15 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2016-04-05 17:14 -0500
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 03:03 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-04-04 19:51 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-04 20:18 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-04-04 20:44 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-04 22:39 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 02:25 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 16:23 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 23:18 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 13:22 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-05 13:34 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 21:28 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 22:34 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-04-01 15:52 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 01:55 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-04 22:38 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-04 23:10 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-05 16:28 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-05 22:35 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-05 21:40 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-05 22:13 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-05 22:44 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-06 02:41 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-06 01:26 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-06 02:02 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-06 09:06 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-06 05:09 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-06 03:50 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-06 19:23 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-06 16:29 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-07 11:32 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-07 15:38 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-08 09:45 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-08 11:04 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-08 17:36 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-08 17:39 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-08 14:08 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-08 10:52 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2016-05-08 14:57 -0500
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-08 13:23 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-09 09:26 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-09 10:26 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-09 09:38 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-09 12:58 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-09 22:53 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-09 22:41 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-09 11:08 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-09 13:21 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-09 23:39 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-09 19:03 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-09 21:44 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-10 08:28 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 12:34 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-10 22:27 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-09 09:16 +0000
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-08 14:01 -0400
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-31 23:26 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-31 19:09 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-31 21:41 -0500
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-31 23:10 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2016-04-01 12:37 -0500
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-01 15:35 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2016-04-01 18:11 -0500
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2016-03-31 19:47 -0700
Re: New "Forth" MCU Board, ChipStick Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-31 23:23 -0700
Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Next page →
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 02:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ndvlil$b9p$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #46490 |
On 4/4/2016 10:51 PM, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 5:11:18 AM UTC-4, Raimond Dragomir wrote: >> duminică, 3 aprilie 2016, 09:09:06 UTC+3, Paul Rubin a scris: >>> Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir.com> writes: >>>> $1.5 sounds expensive. I know a cortex-m0 chip with 64K flash and 8K ram >>>> in LQFP48 which is $1 qty1000 and $0.8 qty2500. A 4Mbit (512KB) serial flash >>>> is $0.25 1000+. PCB + some other components (with a micro-usb connector... >>>> There are cheaper MCUs with only 4K ram, but this sounds too limiting for >>>> a forth system. The most limiting factor here is the RAM, it's hard to get >>>> low prices for higher ram MCUs. But 8K seems quite ok. >>> >>> If you can compile to flash, 4k ram doesn't seem that bad. The >>> msp430g2553 has 256 bytes, fwiw. And the Atmega328 found in zillions of >>> arduinos has 2.5k. But yeah, with that SPI flash, you want some block >>> buffers, so 8k is better. >>> >>> An usb interface like the Digispark's (the card plugs directly into a >>> USB port, no connector) is probably cheaper than a micro usb. Photo: >>> >>> http://digistump.com/products/1 >>> >>> I have to admit puzzlement about the use cases for the board. That >>> seems worth discussing in its own right. Most applications that >>> interest me (though that's just me) need RTC which means a crystal >>> adding cost. Maybe that could be optional. Built-in lipo charger is >>> also nice--more cost. Etc. >> >> Than you would get toward $9. Still one digit price. >> I don't understand this lowest cost race. You always get what you paid for. >> No more. > > That's easy to explain: > Before we started 4e4th on TI's G2 LaunchPad, we named it 4€4th, because at that time with TI's special offer it had been possible to sell TI's G2 LaunchPad as a 4€4th board for 4€ in Europe - or 4$ in the United States. > > But we couldn't get a website 4€4th.eu, so the name was changed to 4e4th, the website named www.4e4th.eu and we started our education initiative, naming our MSP430G2553 Forth "Forth for Education". > > Later TI increased the price of the board, and this chance was over anyway, but the education initiative was started already. > > So still there is some urge to sell a little Forth board for 4€ or 4$ to show what Forth can do in programming education. > > For now only a 4£ board would be feasible without problems. > > 4.4. is a memorable day. It's all a matter of quantity. How many units would you commit to selling at $4 or 4€? Get it to 10,000 and I'm pretty sure I can get a unit out the door if the demands on the capabilities aren't too severe. What processor are you willing to settle for? -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 16:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nduia0$77j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #46429 |
On 4/3/2016 1:14 AM, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > duminică, 3 aprilie 2016, 01:14:44 UTC+3, Paul Rubin a scris: >> Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> writes: >>> Unless I would make a deal with Adafruit (for example) to sell them at $4 >>> and they sell them at $5 making $1 profit per module. My problem would >>> be to make the module at $3, which can be doable at 1000+. >> >> The TI processor alone is $1.5 or something like that. And Adafruit's >> own less powerful Atmel-based Trinket boards start around $7. So this >> sounds difficult. I'll wait and see whether the ChipStick actually >> becomes available at $5. But, a version with SPI flash is almost the >> same board as the one with SRAM, I'd expect. > > $1.5 sounds expensive. I know a cortex-m0 chip with 64K flash and 8K ram > in LQFP48 which is $1 qty1000 and $0.8 qty2500. A 4Mbit (512KB) serial flash > is $0.25 1000+. PCB + some other components (with a micro-usb connector > which is probably the cheapest) will get $2 for BOM. $1 for the chinese > manufacturer -> $3. $1 for the retailer -> $4. $1 for me :D -> $5 on the > shelf. > > There are cheaper MCUs with only 4K ram, but this sounds too limiting for > a forth system. The most limiting factor here is the RAM, it's hard to get > low prices for higher ram MCUs. But 8K seems quite ok. It has been a while, but I know with FPGAs the price is always negotiable. The discount you can get off list price is pretty amazing. But then for most FPGAs, they don't really have any sort of list price other than qty 1. The point is, if you can promise serious quantities, you can get better prices that you will find at Digikey. I've also explained how you don't want to have them made here, then ship them to a retailer. You want to deal with a fab house that has "retail" channels online. They are happy with a lot lower margin than you might realize. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 23:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c1093b0b-30ad-49fb-85a5-ffbba3662c64@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #46483 |
> them to a retailer. You want to deal with a fab house that has "retail" > channels online. They are happy with a lot lower margin than you might > realize. > > -- > > Rick Interesting, I didn't know there are such fabs. I suppose you make the production on your expenses and will get money back as they will sell the items?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 13:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ne0s1l$qj8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #46500 |
On 4/5/2016 2:18 AM, Raimond Dragomir wrote: >> them to a retailer. You want to deal with a fab house that has "retail" >> channels online. They are happy with a lot lower margin than you might >> realize. >> >> -- >> >> Rick > > Interesting, I didn't know there are such fabs. I suppose you make > the production on your expenses and will get money back as they will > sell the items? I may have been premature. I found companies that will make your goods and drop ship them, but so far I haven't found ones that will do the whole 9 yards. The important part is to get them to produce and ship your goods the same why all the cheap items on eBay are made and shipped. Actually, with the state of intellectual piracy seen in the far east, you would be better to let them make the boards and ship with the low cost options, but do the actual sales yourself through say eBay. As the orders come in they are passed to the vendor with little or no involvement from you. If you see them being sold anywhere else you know your design has been pirated. Hard to stop that no matter how you sell them, but this is a good reason to keep the sales on your end. They won't be able to compete so well on price if you are using the same sort of production and shipping. BTW, you won't be able to keep $1 on each board I expect. You need to run the numbers to see for sure. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 13:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87vb3vpzfm.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #46531 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > but do the actual sales yourself through say eBay. As > the orders come in they are passed to the vendor with little or no > involvement from you. If you see them being sold anywhere else you > know your design has been pirated. If you're doing it to get low-cost Forth boards out to the world, then once the pirates get active, you could say "bwahaha now I've got them doing it so I don't have to", leave them at it, and go off to something more profitable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 21:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ne1ohe$3p7$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #46533 |
On 4/5/2016 4:34 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >> but do the actual sales yourself through say eBay. As >> the orders come in they are passed to the vendor with little or no >> involvement from you. If you see them being sold anywhere else you >> know your design has been pirated. > > If you're doing it to get low-cost Forth boards out to the world, then > once the pirates get active, you could say "bwahaha now I've got them > doing it so I don't have to", leave them at it, and go off to something > more profitable. I believe Raimond is looking to make profit. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 22:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9f09401f-478c-4958-87e3-cdc8682f577e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #46540 |
miercuri, 6 aprilie 2016, 04:28:20 UTC+3, rickman a scris: > On 4/5/2016 4:34 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > >> but do the actual sales yourself through say eBay. As > >> the orders come in they are passed to the vendor with little or no > >> involvement from you. If you see them being sold anywhere else you > >> know your design has been pirated. > > > > If you're doing it to get low-cost Forth boards out to the world, then > > once the pirates get active, you could say "bwahaha now I've got them > > doing it so I don't have to", leave them at it, and go off to something > > more profitable. > > I believe Raimond is looking to make profit. > > -- > > Rick :D Yes and no... and not necessarily on this kind of boards... I have a plan though, for an educational board. It will be something more than just a mcu board. It will have some user buttons, some leds, maybe a dot matrix (I have A LOT of a very nice and small 8x8 dot matrix from a project), but anyway something small and around $25 BOM. Battery power only (this will be for kids). I will make the boards myself, 20-25 of them and will begin a teaching classroom about very simple electronics and programming. In forth of course. My bigger problem is something else: running forth will need a workstation with a terminal program. Probably I will buy 20-25 Pi's for that. Still needing 25 keyboards, mouses and monitors... But probably I overestimate the class size. 10 seats will be more manageable...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 15:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b9a26837-7fd2-4499-b55d-4963c49e4699@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #46388 |
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 7:42:09 AM UTC-4, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > > But I don't have any motivation for doing this. Unless I would sell 1000 > of them... minimum :) Go to Kickstarter or Indiegogo !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-02 01:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d212ff8d-b2c5-4a3e-bde8-f9ec0759a44c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #46403 |
sâmbătă, 2 aprilie 2016, 01:52:49 UTC+3, visua...@rocketmail.com a scris: > On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 7:42:09 AM UTC-4, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > > > > But I don't have any motivation for doing this. Unless I would sell 1000 > > of them... minimum :) > > Go to Kickstarter or Indiegogo ! No thanks. Forth doesn't sell well (it doesn't sell at all I may say). And yet another small board with no real added value is something that I just don't believe in.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-04 22:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87y47pcbe2.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #46388 |
Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> writes: > The chipstick guy is MSP430-based obviously. Personally I would make > it with a cortex-m0/m3 small chip and a serial flash. It would be a > 32bit full forth with a file system in serial flash. Probably not $5 > though. This is expensive ($30) but seems very nice: https://www.tindie.com/products/onehorse/dragonfly-stm32l4-breakout-board/ - Teensy sized (0.7" x 1.4" DIP format) - STM32 80 mhz cpu with 512kB on-chip flash and 128kB sram, single prec. FPU - 16MB of QSPI flash on board that presents as USB mass storage to PC host, so you can drag and drop files to it - Powered by USB port or lipo, with Feather-like built in charger I think - Arduino programming environment, could bootstrap Forth from that - Built in RTC (32khz crystal) with supercapacitor backup - i/o, analog conversion etc galore - very low power, similar to Cortex M0 etc. - various add-on modules planned (tiny solder-on boards). The guy has already made some very cool ones for the Teensy This seems to solve most of the deficiencies I've seen in comparable boards. I'm not too bothered by yet another CPU architecture since the GCC toolchain supports it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-04 23:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <43897e1a-0b7b-4952-bd81-d23716a2f05e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #46915 |
joi, 5 mai 2016, 08:38:31 UTC+3, Paul Rubin a scris: > Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> writes: > > The chipstick guy is MSP430-based obviously. Personally I would make > > it with a cortex-m0/m3 small chip and a serial flash. It would be a > > 32bit full forth with a file system in serial flash. Probably not $5 > > though. > > This is expensive ($30) but seems very nice: > > https://www.tindie.com/products/onehorse/dragonfly-stm32l4-breakout-board/ > > - Teensy sized (0.7" x 1.4" DIP format) > - STM32 80 mhz cpu with 512kB on-chip flash and 128kB sram, single prec. FPU > - 16MB of QSPI flash on board that presents as USB mass storage to PC > host, so you can drag and drop files to it > - Powered by USB port or lipo, with Feather-like built in charger I think > - Arduino programming environment, could bootstrap Forth from that > - Built in RTC (32khz crystal) with supercapacitor backup > - i/o, analog conversion etc galore > - very low power, similar to Cortex M0 etc. > - various add-on modules planned (tiny solder-on boards). The guy has > already made some very cool ones for the Teensy > > This seems to solve most of the deficiencies I've seen in comparable > boards. I'm not too bothered by yet another CPU architecture since the > GCC toolchain supports it. This is exactly the board type that can support my forth system completely. As I said, I need a two chip system, a CPU with decent internal RAM (and 128K is quite decent) and a serial flash.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-05 16:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87twicccfz.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #46916 |
Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> writes:
> This is exactly the board type that can support my forth system
> completely. As I said, I need a two chip system, a CPU with decent
> internal RAM (and 128K is quite decent) and a serial flash.
Yep. The USB mass storage interface is a nice touch too.
A couple errors in my post:
1) the board doesn't appear to have a lipo charger, unfortunately.
It can run on a lipo but I don't know what to do about charging.
Maybe he will make an accessory for that, like he did for the
Teensy. The built in charger is a very nice feature of Feather
boards.
2) the CPU architecture is Cortex M4F. I confused it with ST's own
architecture. Claimed power consumption is 100 uA/mhz. That's
lower than I remember seeing even for M0+ or for the MSP430.
Impressive :).
I'm trying to figure out how to contact the builder without signing up
on some damn site, and it's hard.
For my own stuff I don't particularly need 16MB of flash, but wish there
was a lipo charger. Oh well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-05 22:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nggvmo$i6n$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #46921 |
On 5/5/2016 7:28 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> writes: >> This is exactly the board type that can support my forth system >> completely. As I said, I need a two chip system, a CPU with decent >> internal RAM (and 128K is quite decent) and a serial flash. > > Yep. The USB mass storage interface is a nice touch too. > > A couple errors in my post: > > 1) the board doesn't appear to have a lipo charger, unfortunately. > It can run on a lipo but I don't know what to do about charging. > Maybe he will make an accessory for that, like he did for the > Teensy. The built in charger is a very nice feature of Feather > boards. Battery charging is a feature needed on only a small percentage of designs that would not be a custom design. It is an easy function to add on a separate board. I can see why it is not included on most SBCs. > 2) the CPU architecture is Cortex M4F. I confused it with ST's own > architecture. Claimed power consumption is 100 uA/mhz. That's > lower than I remember seeing even for M0+ or for the MSP430. > Impressive :). I think 100 uA/MHz is not so unusual these days. The Ambiq Micro Apollo MCU uses subthreshold switching and a switching regulator to get current down to 34 uA/MHz. *That's* unusual. > I'm trying to figure out how to contact the builder without signing up > on some damn site, and it's hard. > > For my own stuff I don't particularly need 16MB of flash, but wish there > was a lipo charger. Oh well. A board which is plugged in between the MCU board and the power source could easily be used to provide this function. It doesn't need any interaction with the MCU other than possibly providing a status indicator (charge level/charging status), it just needs to provide power. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-05 21:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87poszdcjn.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #46923 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > Battery charging is a feature needed on only a small percentage of > designs that would not be a custom design. I don't see why someone wanting to run a board on a lipo cell wouldn't also want to charge the cell in-circuit. Especially in a low-powered board like this, whose destination is likely to be a wearable or on an ultralight UAV or something. > It is an easy function to add on a separate board. I can see why it > is not included on most SBCs. I tought the idea of such high integration on these boards is to get rid of the need for separate boards ;-). This particular board was made because designer got tired of adding separate boards to the PJRC Teensy. > I think 100 uA/MHz is not so unusual these days. I remember seeing figures like that for the smaller Cortex parts but this one is quite fancy. Maybe I haven't kept up though. > The Ambiq Micro Apollo MCU uses subthreshold switching and a switching > regulator to get current down to 34 uA/MHz. *That's* unusual. Yes. I have trouble grokking it but it's apparently real. Wow!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-05 22:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <96258e2d-bf4e-40b8-8b43-53c3cf8675e1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #46925 |
> I don't see why someone wanting to run a board on a lipo cell wouldn't > also want to charge the cell in-circuit. Especially in a low-powered > board like this, whose destination is likely to be a wearable or on an > ultralight UAV or something. Good point. I have a design with a BQ24032A charger. If you look at the datasheet you can see how awsome it is :) > > I think 100 uA/MHz is not so unusual these days. > > I remember seeing figures like that for the smaller Cortex parts but > this one is quite fancy. Maybe I haven't kept up though. > I'm sure I saw 85uA/MHz for some cortex, but I don't remember the part.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-05 22:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87lh3nd9lj.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #46926 |
Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> writes: > Good point. I have a design with a BQ24032A charger. If you look at the > datasheet you can see how awsome it is :) Looks nice! The Adafruit Feather cpu boards all have chargers (don't know what part) and I thought it was a great feature. adafruit.com/feather has pictures etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-06 02:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nghe52$iuf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #46925 |
On 5/6/2016 12:40 AM, Paul Rubin wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >> Battery charging is a feature needed on only a small percentage of >> designs that would not be a custom design. > > I don't see why someone wanting to run a board on a lipo cell wouldn't > also want to charge the cell in-circuit. Especially in a low-powered > board like this, whose destination is likely to be a wearable or on an > ultralight UAV or something. Maybe I missed something. Why is powering from a LiPo cell assumed? The board in the link can be powered by any voltage source of appropriate voltage, no? The LiPo isn't part of the board is it? >> It is an easy function to add on a separate board. I can see why it >> is not included on most SBCs. > > I tought the idea of such high integration on these boards is to get rid > of the need for separate boards ;-). This particular board was made > because designer got tired of adding separate boards to the PJRC Teensy. Fine, but then it becomes a bit of a specialty board. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that. I'm just saying this board doesn't have any special features for using the LiPo that I can see. So I don't get why you are saying it is any different in this regard than the many other mainstream MCU boards that can be powered by anything that doesn't blow up the on board regulator. Or maybe I missed something. >> I think 100 uA/MHz is not so unusual these days. > > I remember seeing figures like that for the smaller Cortex parts but > this one is quite fancy. Maybe I haven't kept up though. Thee Ambiq chip is a CM4. The only limitation is that it can't run at the higher clock rates. More conventional devices run at the higher clock rates and get 100 uA/Mhz. I can't name one off the top of my head, but the current for a given speed is a number that keeps getting pushed up as these already tiny chips are made with newer and lower power processes. Here's Atmel's blurb on the SAM4L SAM4L Device Details The world’s most efficient Cortex-M4 picoPower®Technology •Industry’s lowest power consumption •Active mode: down to 90μA/MHz Of course these are not terribly realistic figures for a real application, but they can be verified if you duplicate whatever setup they used. >> The Ambiq Micro Apollo MCU uses subthreshold switching and a switching >> regulator to get current down to 34 uA/MHz. *That's* unusual. > > Yes. I have trouble grokking it but it's apparently real. Wow! For limited values of "real". I seem to recall reading the details and they get this current at the Vcore input which is very low voltage. They have an on chip switching regulator which requires an external inductor (0603 maybe?) and cap. This means running from a lower voltage gets you less current gain and higher current. I think the core voltage is 0.8 volts instead of 1.5 or 1.8. They say they are shipping production quantities, but try to buy one. I recall when Xilinx shipped "production quantities" of their new Spartan 3 chip, but no one could get their hands on even a sample! Being a brand new company, they likely will be in limited availability for some time until they start acknowledging the more general market and not just the million+ annual purchase customers. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-06 01:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87h9ebd237.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #46928 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > Maybe I missed something. Why is powering from a LiPo cell assumed? It says right in the blurb that you can power it from USB or a lipo cell. Lipo is obviously one of the intended power sources.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-06 02:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <910a899e-a907-440b-ae87-cf6ac7162414@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #46929 |
vineri, 6 mai 2016, 11:26:22 UTC+3, Paul Rubin a scris: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > > Maybe I missed something. Why is powering from a LiPo cell assumed? > > It says right in the blurb that you can power it from USB or a lipo > cell. Lipo is obviously one of the intended power sources. Lipo (li-ion in fact) is 3.7V nominal. It's max is 4.2V when charging and usually 4.00 - 4.05 V when using it right after that. You need an LDO or switching reg. to make the 3.3V for the system. The problem is when the battery goes under 3V (depends of course of what other devices you have on board and if they can support under 3V inputs - for example the USB is known to not working reliable under 3V). I made a system with a high efficiency switching boost reg, from lipo to 5V, and then having also a high efficiency switching buck reg. from 5V to 3.3V. The system works quite a bit longer with this arrangement (despite having two 90-95% converters in series - so an equivalent of 80-90%), reliable down to 2.7V on the battery with a very nice constant 3.3V. My inital system without a step-up converter had an USB issue. It worked quite well with the battery under 3V, but without the USB. And the USB were quite vital...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-06 09:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87d1ozcgsh.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #46931 |
Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> writes: > Lipo (li-ion in fact) is 3.7V nominal. It's max is 4.2V when charging and > usually 4.00 - 4.05 V when using it right after that. You need an LDO or > switching reg. to make the 3.3V for the system. The problem is when the > battery goes under 3V That's bad for the battery so I would hope the regulation system shuts down the board well before the battery voltage gets that low. > My inital system without a step-up converter had an USB issue. It > worked quite well with the battery under 3V, but without the USB. And > the USB were quite vital... I think that is way out of spec for USB even if it appeared to work when you tested it. But you're probably more on top of it than I am.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web