Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

kickstarter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 33 posts

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#21

Post by pvidler »

teraflop wrote: post #16
revelation wrote: post #10

Is there stable support for this architecture in GCC and related projects? That is, is there a standard-conforming open toolchain? Otherwise I wouldn't even bother.

Looks that way. The basic architecture is ARM, which is quite well-supported by GCC and binutils. I managed to find a Technical Reference Manual on Cypress' website, which seems to have plenty of information on the hardware peripherals: http://www.cypress.com/?docID=36586 This thing seems to occupy an interesting point in the hobbyist ecosystem. The processor is several times more expensive than other chips with simi…

In fairness the TI launchpads are astoundingly cheap -- as far as I have seen, very few of the other competitors have dev boards at that sort of price.

The mbed board is similar to the mini, but with an online IDE (not a fan) and community. There's not much difference in price there, at least not from the mbed suppliers here in the UK vs the kickstarter prices.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#22

Post by dag11 »

Zenst wrote: post #17

Best pair of odd sock(sic) I've seen in ages. What is interesting is the ability to program them via a graphical drag and drop style visual programming language and that is something for people learning that will appeal strongly. As for the specs and abilities I shall leave that to those more vested in this microcontroller.

It has dragging and dropping some components of the program, but still requires code. It's not a visual programming language. Also, even the visual aspect of it is rather technical. To fully use this board, it seems one has to already be familiar with datasheets, C, and the concepts of components like PWM or protocols like I2C, and so on.

That said, this seems to be a great product for people who already have some experience with these concepts, and want an Arduino-like device that better suits them. I think I'll be buying this board. I'll sleep on it, though.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#23

Post by mtdev »

pvidler wrote: post #20
mtdev wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PSoC5 is supported by GCC, the Cypress PSoC IDE just makes it easier for novices to get started. There is also a FreeRTOS port to PSoC5, so you can get into some pretty interesting stuff. That aside, I am really glad they went with PSoC5 (ARM Cortex-M3 architecture) instead of the cheaper PSoC3 (8051 architecture). This makes it easy to prototype on the PSoC5 and then move to a more specialized Cortex when they hit p…

Just from the descriptions and photos, it looks like the mini will be breadboardable. The bigger one almost certainly not -- it's arduino compatible and the gap on one side is visibly smaller than the other. Also, it's not clear if the big one will have pins dropping down below the board (just looks like female headers).

Yep, I just looked at the pinouts on the larger one and its very likely that they kept the same out-of-spec spacing as the Arduino Uno.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#24

Post by Zenst »

dag11 wrote: post #22
Zenst wrote: post #17

Best pair of odd sock(sic) I've seen in ages. What is interesting is the ability to program them via a graphical drag and drop style visual programming language and that is something for people learning that will appeal strongly. As for the specs and abilities I shall leave that to those more vested in this microcontroller.

It has dragging and dropping some components of the program, but still requires code. It's not a visual programming language. Also, even the visual aspect of it is rather technical. To fully use this board, it seems one has to already be familiar with datasheets, C, and the concepts of components like PWM or protocols like I2C, and so on. That said, this seems to be a great product for people who already have some ex…

Yes I do fall into that concepts catergory, though does seem more approachable. I too am sleeping upon it.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#25

Post by joezydeco »

Zenst wrote: post #17

Best pair of odd sock(sic) I've seen in ages. What is interesting is the ability to program them via a graphical drag and drop style visual programming language and that is something for people learning that will appeal strongly. As for the specs and abilities I shall leave that to those more vested in this microcontroller.

With PSoC Creator, you're not really programming via the editor GUI. You're actually configuring the internal hardware, which is compiled into routines and tables that are run through the chip at startup. Think of it more like an FPGA where you are hooking gates and blocks up to various pins. The software can also control and redirect these lines from inside running code, but having the GUI set things up for you is a lot easier than spending a week with the Technical Reference Manual...all 1000+ pages of it.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#26

Post by joezydeco »

mtdev wrote: post #12
revelation wrote: post #10

Is there stable support for this architecture in GCC and related projects? That is, is there a standard-conforming open toolchain? Otherwise I wouldn't even bother.

PSoC5 is supported by GCC, the Cypress PSoC IDE just makes it easier for novices to get started. There is also a FreeRTOS port to PSoC5, so you can get into some pretty interesting stuff. That aside, I am really glad they went with PSoC5 (ARM Cortex-M3 architecture) instead of the cheaper PSoC3 (8051 architecture). This makes it easy to prototype on the PSoC5 and then move to a more specialized Cortex when they hit p…

The IDE isn't just for novices, unless you really want to hand-configure every I/O pin and block on the device. That can take a hell of a lot of time to read through the documentation and figure out. It's not just a matter of "oh this pin is an input and this is an output" like Arduino/AVR.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#27

Post by jmole »

tibbon wrote: post #3

To sum up the pain points that this is fixing: - More pins, enabling more input/output. While there are some projects that only need a few pins, larger ones like big interactive light installations benefit from more - Almost all pins are analog or digital compatible, with a few high current digital ones - Compatible with Arduino header boards - Better IDE - Included ADC (two types, one can drive CD-quality audio), DA…

Hey All, Jon Moeller here.

Thanks for all the support so far, I've received just under 20 backers from direct referrals from here, and I really appreciate it.

This is a great summary of the pain points I'm trying to address.

I really can't emphasize enough how revolutionary the PSoC Creator IDE is. I've been using it for the past three years, and it FAR exceeds any other MCU development environment I've ever used. (including a few mentioned in the comments here)

If you are on the fence about it, download the IDE from cypress.com and try it out, it's totally free and always will be. They have several example projects you can get to from the File->Open menu, which illustrate much of the functionality.

Thanks again for the publicity and the support!

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#28

Post by jmole »

forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #6

The best Microcontroller? Does it works on Linux or mac?. No. It that software opensource? No Why then I should choose this thing instead of more powerful and closed micros like this?: http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_P...

I use a mac, exclusively, and VirtualBox runs PSoC Creator flawlessly, both with WinXP and Win7.

I actually find developing on the mac quite useful, since when I'm making a USB device with PSoC, I can use libusb (cross-platform USB library) without having to install any device drivers. It works great with PyUSB and makes developing USB projects a snap.

The IDE isn't open source, but it is free.

I would argue that this is indeed the best microcontroller for hobbyists and students.

It's like having an FPGA, a 32 bit micro, and a handful of analog parts, that you can connect however you like in software using a graphical interface.

If you want to dig deeper, you can program any of the PLD-based digital blocks in verilog, hand tune your analog design routing, and more.

You could even implement an additional 8-bit CPU on the block diagram using drag and drop components if you're really feeling frisky.

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#29

Post by iRobot »

There are quite a few arduino users waiting to make the move to 32 bit, arduino are not doing themselves any favours with their delayed offering, the appropriately named "due" and this is the third "arduino" like offering I've seen on kickstarter in the past month, the Galago, Teensy3 and now this, all trying to tease the developer scared of the raw GCC toolkit on to ARM.

The Raspberry Pi has actually emerged as the hardware of choice for the majority but while it has good support at the linux level, it is not so good down at the bare-metal level and the PCB layout, closed source drivers and choice of connectors were not the best for would-be hardware hackers (though many are trying and making progress).

RPi2 anyone?

Re: freeSoC and freeSoC Mini

#30

Post by zokier »

Seems like fairly reasonable piece of hardware. But what I really dislike is the name. SoC is an established acronym in the industry, so at first I was thinking that they'd be developing their own free (as in speech) SoC. But instead they are just making yet another dev board for a proprietary SoC.
Post reply on HN