BasicMicro - Forums

There is apparently a speed craze among microcontroller users as to who's chip is faster. My concern is really not the speed, but, if you claim that chip XYZ is fastER than chip ABC, then substantiate your claim. I judge a chip according to its capabilities to a greater extent and to its speed to a lesser extent. For example, the NANOs have a nice 32-bit math capability, and the PICAXE and Basic Stamp do not. To me, this is more important than whether the PICAXE runs around the block faster than the NANO28 or vice versa. For what most of us do, the garden variety chips, including the Nano and PICAXE, are just fine. As was stated in another email, if someone is itching for higher speeds, then the ATOM PROs have no competition. I am currently using the ARC32 on some projects, and, if you want to talk about speed, get that baby to talk to you. A clear winner in the speed arena!
Dr.Andrew

_________________
amcnano

Ok, well there's the Nano 28x, a 20mhz version of the normal Nano 28, but it uses an external oscillator. Which is fine.
Still hoping for a nano 18 version of this, pcb size constraints make the 28 a little too long for some projects.

Also still hoping for the a Pro variation of the Nano. Nano Pro 28 anyone?

Now then, about your post. It almost feels like you're advertising the Arc32's capabilities, and comparing them to the Nanos.

The Nanos have a few advantages over the Arc32. Different variations of boards the Nanos can be used on, their size, and their cost.
For a tiny project, a $100 Arc32 is overkill. Even if it is superior. Further more, on small projects such as some of the ones I build, an Arc32 would simply be too large, where a BAP28 will suffice just fine when accompanied by a small board.


Now then, there should be a comparison chart to list the advantages and disadvantages of each MCU. It should be fair and unbiased. It should give the customer what they need to make an informed purchase.
A biased or unfair chart will only chase away potential customers.

Keep in mind, MCU's like the atom, atom pro, and Arc32 are a big investment for newcomers, and they may be intimidated by the price.
Nanos are a fantastic way to bring in new customers. They are small and cheap and easy to use. So users can get comfortable with the Basic Programming language, and the Basic Atom in general, while still financially within their "comfort zone".

_________________

Basic Micro Blog
Universal Robot Controller

You missed the point. All I am trying to say is that, quite often, speed is not the only parameter we should get a headache over. You review a microcontroller's instruction set, language used, ease of use, ports available, external use of parts or not, etc.,etc., and, above all (the most important part to me), availability of documentation and tech support. The Nanos, as they are, including the X's, are fine for most applications and better, hands down (I am a little biased here), than the PICAXE. I do like the NANO 32-bit integer and floating-point math, since I fool around with DSP now and then. I did not specifically advertise the ARC32. I mentioned it for more serious projects, like driving a lot of servos on a hexapod or industrial use. In those cases, the application would warrant such an expense and possibly speed.

_________________
amcnano

Gotcha, but you also missed the point.
You don't need to advertise the nanos capabilities over the PICAxe or the Basic Stamp here.
That's like going to the Harry Potter fan club, and telling them how great harry potter is.

If anything, if you want to convince people to use the nano over the picaxe or the basic stamp, goto the picaxe and basic stamp forums.

This whole thread is a mess really. But really, you don't need to advertise the basic nano on the basic nano forums.
And i get it, you have affiliation with the nano's boards, and even the nano itself. And i thank you for your contributions.

I'm also working with Bmicro, (or trying to) about spreading the Nano "love", hoping that it'll some day replace the picaxe, stamp, and even the arduino as a small cheap micro controller for the masses. So far, things are going a bit slow.

_________________

Basic Micro Blog
Universal Robot Controller

Going up against intrenched competitors means things are going to go slow, Fallentine.

That, and we aren't a big company so the workload means most things take longer than we'd like.

_________________
Tech Support
Basic Micro - Robotic Technology Evolved

Dear Guru

Thank you for the motherly advice as to how I should conduct myself on the forum. I will keep your instructions in mind.

One of the things the Nano needs is applications. I and my colleagues have written some of them, but, after having asked the BMicro management where to post them, I have received no reply as yet. The applications may appear trivial but were created to be included in a workbook that I would like to publish for the novice. How to hook up an led, piezo, servo,keyboard, etc. I am sure that topics like those would be boring to a "Guru" such as you. However, anyone else is welcome to whatever we have created.

Dr.Andrew

_________________
amcnano

You can drop the "visit the competition's boards and preach", they'll just delete your posts and drop your membership. What you CAN do is ask (innocently) how the forum's related product compares to a Nano and one of the development boards, and point out it is cheaper (usually). Then stand back, wrapped in abestos, and admire the fireworks. You won't get much useful output from them, but other people looking for something to learn processors with will see the Nano as a cheaper alternative and go look at it. Ehh! Can't hurt.

I visit a few universal boards, like electro-tech-online.com. They aren't selling anything, nor are they affiliated with any distributors or manufacturers (well, there are some members who hawk their own wares), so its largely atheistic that way. I peruse their forums and look for beginners seeking advice on which is the cheapest/easiest processor/language to start with, or someone looking to find an existing embedded board to base their early product on. I invariably recommend the nano in some form, mostly the Nano Driver Board.
Just doing my bit for the cause.

_________________
kenjj
http://blog.basicmicro.com/
http://kjennejohn.wordpress.com/

Whoooa, easy on the flame wars, OK? No squabbling in the choir! Hush that!

Hell, Doc, if you have Nano related programs and examples, post them here, and bless you. They can be made "sticky", so they'll always be available, right at the top of the Nano forum.
And bless you, again!
I heard elsewhere you have designed some more Nano boards (an Arduino even?! ), but I see none of this/these at the amcnano.com site. You holding out on us, doc?

_________________
kenjj
http://blog.basicmicro.com/
http://kjennejohn.wordpress.com/

Hi Ken

I was told that I should not use the forum for advertising products. And that is quite correct. A forum is to exchange ideas, and possibly projects, among members. If anyone is interested, please, send me a note at information@amcnano.com

Thank you for the plug, anyway, old friend.

Dr.Andrew

_________________
amcnano

By the way, sometime ago,I did what was suggested to me in an earlier post--i.e visited the PICAXE forum and praised the Nanos on many fronts. I am now persona non grata on that forum. Oh, well...

Dr.Andrew

_________________
amcnano