Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Matt Krass
I assume you're speaking of the STK500 board, in which case, you are flat out wrong. That board cannot do anything the IFI system does save for program a Flash based microcontroller. It is a very fancy, albeit useful multi-AVR programmer with some builtin debug features, and a builtin array of LEDs and buttons for testing. The obvious features such as PWM generation, I/O and ADC hardware require a chip with far more pins than a 40 pin PDIP AVR could ever supply, not to mention it doesn't support the ease of connection ability or any number of little things, such as pulldown resistors, multiple ADC inputs (16 last I checked), relay outputs, multiple serial ports (the DB-9s on the board must be jumpered by ribbons to the proper pins on the AVR, and even then only one of them is directly accessible, the other talks to the STK500s processor array.) You can't fully emulate the IFI control system with any combination of chips on that board, not in full functionality with all the extras you probably don't even realize you have and take for granted. There's also the cost of the development IFI put in to the pre-existing controller libraries and default code, which gives you much of that functionality you arbitrarily claimed the STK500 could do.
In short, there's just no way that $80 development board could emulate the IFI system properly, and have all the pre-existing software support and safety features, plus it definitely does not have a built-on 900MHz radio system.
Before you go bashing IFI and making wild claims, make sure they have some foundation.
|
I am referring to the stk500. But I also have the stk503 that can run 100 pin chips. Also doesn't the IFI system have 2 processors? So if I were to actually try to make a new system I could use 2 procesors, right? So I could run a ATMEGA128 or ATMEGA2560 and with one chip I could emulate most of the features on the IFI system. Also I would outsource somethings, such as PWM because I think it would make the code run better, though using a USART you would only need a set of 3 charaters to set the pwm. It would require less timers and less general code to run them. Also I would want to use the IFI radios just because I think it would make it easier then finding a whole new wireless communication system.
I don't think I could do this myself, that is why I asked a couple of electrical and software engineers to help me work things out with this. I don't think it will be completely easy but I do think it is possible.