Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sparksandtabs
Is there a significant reason for predicting that the PIC is here to stay? THere are plenty other mC that are just as easy and even easier to use. AVRs, Gumstix, ect.....
The advantage of switching to another mC I think is that there is more support for the one they switch to.
Speaking from personal expirience and you can ask mike from 237 and matt krass I think it is about AVRs, but they are EXTREMELY EASY TO USE. You can get compilers that make libraries for you, I know of a few compilers that let you write code in other languages. So maybe for a rookie team they can program in PBASIC because they don't have much time to focus on that part. Then in off-season they switch to C
I feel like they kinda need to reassess the whole system and see what is absolutely necessary. After that they can start to add fancy bell and whistles.
Like as to the radio problem, what if they changed it to a blue tooth radio but made it a standard part just like the radios now. Just plug and play.
Also maybe IFI can make some ambidextrous joysticks rather then FIRST giving us 2 right handed ones. I just don't see how you can build a robot in six weeks but can't figure out how to make ambidextrous joysticks. I even remember one team using pens for the handles!
|
Gumstix.... They have a lot of power and engineering built into them already, yet they'd need even more engineering to start approaching the capabilities of the current RC, I think. And I don't think IFI is in the business of reselling other people's controllers anyways. As far as the ATmega processor... it seems comparable to the PIC. 8-bit, A/D, etc. I I'll take your word for it on the compiliers and libraries and such, but any product from IFI is not likely to be an open architecture where you can do whatever you please. So I'm not certain there's an advantage there.
For joysticks, IFI isn't in the business of providing them or making them. You'll note that there isn't a single one on their site, so you're barking up the wrong tree.
Finally, bluetooth. *shudders* Okay. So Bluetooth works in the same frequency band as 802.11b+g wireless lans, and is meant for low power devices with an operating range of 30 ft. This means it's highly susceptible to being blocked by people, metal and generally just about anything. It's also likely to be interfered with by networks at universities, laptops, cordless phones, and microwaves. on top of this, if you're actually implementing Bluetooth, it has to accept and deal with attempts by other bluetooth devices to sync with it. So basically, I think it's a lot more trouble than it's worth. Meanwhile, IFI's radios are pretty darn robust and have good range and deal well with noise, etc.