ComputerVoltageSources

Hello everyone

I'm just wondering if there is any kind of status update on the state
of the main processor PCB layout?

Larry T.

Last plan was that Grant was going to fax me a sketch
of the CPU schematic and I would draw it... then we
will proceed. I have not heard anything since, but
he's
prlly busy like me :^P

H^) harry

--- "Larry T." <larry@...> wrote:

> Hello everyone
>
> I'm just wondering if there is any kind of status
> update on the state
> of the main processor PCB layout?
>
> Larry T.
>
>
>
>

I still don't see a datasheet for the BasicAtomPro28M on the BasicMicro website.

There are questions about the reset circuitry and if the current dev system supports the
additional 4 analog inputs. Dave Brown seems to have one working, did you find anything
about the reset problem you were having?

I really have not had the time or money to buy a 28M and hand trace a schematic and test
the software.

It seems brash to commit to a copper board with the number of questions still remaining
about the processor core itself.

I think issuing a PC board with unresolved technical issues may do more harm than good.

Grant Richter

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Harry Bissell Jr <harrybissell@...>
wrote:

>
> Last plan was that Grant was going to fax me a sketch
> of the CPU schematic and I would draw it... then we
> will proceed. I have not heard anything since, but
> he's
> prlly busy like me :^P
>
> H^) harry
>
> --- "Larry T." <larry@...> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone
> >
> > I'm just wondering if there is any kind of status
> > update on the state
> > of the main processor PCB layout?
> >
> > Larry T.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

The problem is that I am not getting a warm fuzzy about Basic Micros commitment to the
Pro module product line.

If we go to all this trouble and they discontinue the 28M, where are we?

On the other side, the 50 or so sales of 28M modules that would come from this board,
might be enough to get some momentum behind the 28M product.

The responsibility falls to the manufacturer to move the product forward, or give a clear
indication of their intentions.

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter" <grichter@...> wrote:
>
> I still don't see a datasheet for the BasicAtomPro28M on the BasicMicro website.
>
> There are questions about the reset circuitry and if the current dev system supports the
> additional 4 analog inputs. Dave Brown seems to have one working, did you find
anything
> about the reset problem you were having?
>
> I really have not had the time or money to buy a 28M and hand trace a schematic and
test
> the software.
>
> It seems brash to commit to a copper board with the number of questions still
remaining
> about the processor core itself.
>
> I think issuing a PC board with unresolved technical issues may do more harm than
good.
>
> Grant Richter
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Harry Bissell Jr <harrybissell@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Last plan was that Grant was going to fax me a sketch
> > of the CPU schematic and I would draw it... then we
> > will proceed. I have not heard anything since, but
> > he's
> > prlly busy like me :^P
> >
> > H^) harry
> >
> > --- "Larry T." <larry@> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone
> > >
> > > I'm just wondering if there is any kind of status
> > > update on the state
> > > of the main processor PCB layout?
> > >
> > > Larry T.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

In a message dated 7/25/2006 1:24:24 PM Pacific Standard Time,
grichter@... writes:

The responsibility falls to the manufacturer to move the product forward, or
give a clear
indication of their intentions.




mike,
granted, its a different gizmo being discussed but somehow i found this
statement by grant interesting considering how little we, the devoted, actually
hear from him about anything ! :^)
best,
dave



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

sorry for the public posting, misdirected
best,
dave



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dave and I have passed back a few emails about the 28M reset. It apppears
BasicMicro added a three pin Power On Reset chip to the 28M, fixing a
problem Dave saw on the original 24M. So the fix he was trying to put in is
unnecessary, and conflicts with the POR circuit.

Dave confirmed that the current software supports the additional 4 analog
inputs.

A 28M data sheet would be nice, but at this point it doesn't seem to add
anything that we don't already know.

John Loffink
The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant Richter
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 3:08 PM
> To: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [ComputerVoltageSources] Re: Status on main processor board?
>
> I still don't see a datasheet for the BasicAtomPro28M on the BasicMicro
> website.
>
> There are questions about the reset circuitry and if the current dev
> system supports the
> additional 4 analog inputs. Dave Brown seems to have one working, did you
> find anything
> about the reset problem you were having?
>
> I really have not had the time or money to buy a 28M and hand trace a
> schematic and test
> the software.
>
> It seems brash to commit to a copper board with the number of questions
> still remaining
> about the processor core itself.
>
> I think issuing a PC board with unresolved technical issues may do more
> harm than good.
>
> Grant Richter
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Harry Bissell Jr
> <harrybissell@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Last plan was that Grant was going to fax me a sketch
> > of the CPU schematic and I would draw it... then we
> > will proceed. I have not heard anything since, but
> > he's
> > prlly busy like me :^P
> >
> > H^) harry
> >
> > --- "Larry T." <larry@...> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone
> > >
> > > I'm just wondering if there is any kind of status
> > > update on the state
> > > of the main processor PCB layout?
> > >
> > > Larry T.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

BasicMicro is selling the 28M PRO part on their website and it is supported
in their software, both for the last six months or longer. Other than
publishing a data sheet that shows four more analog inputs, what would
constitute a clear indication of their intentions?

It is obvious that BasicMicro is a small time operation. That hasn't
changed since they brought out their product.

If we want to play it safe, then a Parallax BASIC STAMP Product is the
obvious way to go, with Parallax having created the BASIC microcontroller
market. That throws out any PSIM program compatibility though.

The Parallax BASIC STAMP top performing products are advertised at 12-19,000
BASIC instructions per second compared to the ATOMPRO 24/28 at 100,000
instructions per second. Would we want to trade off apparent performance
for potential longevity of supply? That's a valid topic of discussion. So
is the need for PSIM compatibility.

John Loffink
The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant Richter
>
> The problem is that I am not getting a warm fuzzy about Basic Micros
> commitment to the
> Pro module product line.
>
> If we go to all this trouble and they discontinue the 28M, where are we?
>
> On the other side, the 50 or so sales of 28M modules that would come from
> this board,
> might be enough to get some momentum behind the 28M product.
>
> The responsibility falls to the manufacturer to move the product forward,
> or give a clear
> indication of their intentions.
>

I don't understand why they don't have a datasheet. It isn't rocket
science. However, there are a lot of strengths to this part.

It is available.

It is fast. I am merging MIDI streams while scanning my bass pedals
and sending MIDI (at 38,25 kbaud) and display data (at 57,600 kbaud)
and running timer interrupts at 1 mS. Not bad for basic. I'm not
sure we'd get that kind of performance out of other products and I do
a lot of MIDI processing.

Hardware floating point. I've benchmarked it and it is only slightly
slower than integer performance.

I've verified the on-chip eeprom. I've also verified the I2C input
and output.

Positive and negative edge interrupts. Great for capturing quick
triggers.

The development environment works quite well. I've got no issues with
it. Always reliable.

Reasonable code space. I was a bit concerned about adding 128 defined
strings to display GM MIDI instruments but that program only took 12.5
kbytes and I have 20 kbytes of code space left.

For me, code compatibility is pretty important but that's only because
I have 32 programs and don't feel like figuring out all the nuances of
a new compiler.

On the downside, the interrupts for the 3rd timer don't work in the
current compiler and the include function doesn't work which requires
each program to be stand alone.

As to the reset, they added a power-on reset chip. I guess it is a
nice feature as the PSIM doesn't always reliably reset (I added a
capacitor to mine). This circuit generates a 360 mS reset with fast
edges so you can guarantee that all external devices reset. I assume
it would be described in the data sheet if there were one. My issue
was trying to reset it externally with a switch. Not a good idea on a
totem pole output. I only noticed this as I plugged the part into a
current design PCB that has a reset switch and noticed the difference
in operation.

I actually see few risks with commiting this to copper as many of the
interfaces / timing / etc. have been validated (MIDI, I2C, timer
interrupts, edge interrupts, etc.) but that is just my humble opinion.

Dave


--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Richter"
<grichter@...> wrote:

>
> I still don't see a datasheet for the BasicAtomPro28M on the

BasicMicro website.

>
> There are questions about the reset circuitry and if the current dev

system supports the

> additional 4 analog inputs. Dave Brown seems to have one working,

did you find anything

> about the reset problem you were having?
>
> I really have not had the time or money to buy a 28M and hand trace

a schematic and test

> the software.
>
> It seems brash to commit to a copper board with the number of

questions still remaining

> about the processor core itself.
>
> I think issuing a PC board with unresolved technical issues may do

more harm than good.

>
> Grant Richter
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, Harry Bissell Jr

<harrybissell@>

> wrote:
> >
> > Last plan was that Grant was going to fax me a sketch
> > of the CPU schematic and I would draw it... then we
> > will proceed. I have not heard anything since, but
> > he's
> > prlly busy like me :^P
> >
> > H^) harry
> >
> > --- "Larry T." <larry@> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone
> > >
> > > I'm just wondering if there is any kind of status
> > > update on the state
> > > of the main processor PCB layout?
> > >
> > > Larry T.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Hi all,

I like John's point in that it addresses what i perceive to be one of
the fundamental principles behind the creation of this forum, namely:
alternatives.
Grant and Harry are pursuing a cool little project at the pace that
their busy adult lives allow. Like any real world project, their
design and methods represent compromises among conflicting
parameters, ie performance, durability, supportability and
compatibility with an existing body of application software.
But there are plenty of other ways to skin this cat and this forum is
the best one i've encountered for a discussion of those alternatives.
Some alternatives already exist like the PSIM, MIDIbox.org, and the
Buchla 300(!) this forum certainly has room for subtopic segmentation.
(IMHO software would be the best organizing principle for
segmentation. ie PSIM-compatible, BASICStamp, etc.)
Harry and Grant seem to be the farthest along on their endeavor but
that shouldn't discourage anyone from pursuing a different design. I
believe this forum exists to support their efforts with a free
exchange of information and provide them with a communication channel
to interested customers/subscribers.
i enjoy the good fortune to already have a CVS platform but if
anything , it makes me more sympathetic to the impatience of those who
are unable to obtain one. Nevertheless this allows me the luxury of
waiting until Grant and Harry feel very secure about the robustness of
their design.
But that's just me.
It's a marketplace of ideas here and this is a good place to make
proposals and see how much traction they get among the readers.
Specific to the BASICStamp: i've done some hobby robotics with it and
Parallax is certainly a better established supplier than BasicMicro,
and the BASICStamp is better supported. i agree that it is a safer
choice for long term support. I also believe that a processor can't be
*too* fast , so BasicMicro has an edge there but on the other hand,
i'm not convinced that the BasicStamp couldn't do a very good job ,
perhaps in a smaller scale design than Grant did for the BasicAtom.
i support Grant's and Harry's project simply because it suits my
particular needs (and my NON-schedule) best but that shouldn't
discourage anyone from pursuing a different project.

Best,
-doc



--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink"
<jloffink@...> wrote:

>
> BasicMicro is selling the 28M PRO part on their website and it is

supported

> in their software, both for the last six months or longer. Other than
> publishing a data sheet that shows four more analog inputs, what would
> constitute a clear indication of their intentions?
>
> It is obvious that BasicMicro is a small time operation. That hasn't
> changed since they brought out their product.
>
> If we want to play it safe, then a Parallax BASIC STAMP Product is the
> obvious way to go, with Parallax having created the BASIC

microcontroller

> market. That throws out any PSIM program compatibility though.
>
> The Parallax BASIC STAMP top performing products are advertised at

12-19,000

> BASIC instructions per second compared to the ATOMPRO 24/28 at 100,000
> instructions per second. Would we want to trade off apparent

performance

> for potential longevity of supply? That's a valid topic of

discussion. So

> is the need for PSIM compatibility.
>
> John Loffink
> The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant

Richter

> >
> > The problem is that I am not getting a warm fuzzy about Basic Micros
> > commitment to the
> > Pro module product line.
> >
> > If we go to all this trouble and they discontinue the 28M, where

are we?

> >
> > On the other side, the 50 or so sales of 28M modules that would

come from

> > this board,
> > might be enough to get some momentum behind the 28M product.
> >
> > The responsibility falls to the manufacturer to move the product

forward,

> > or give a clear
> > indication of their intentions.
> >
>

I guess the consensus is that he 28M is viable.

I will knock out the rest of the design sheets this coming week.

Onward and up ward.

--- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "drmabuce" <drmabuce@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I like John's point in that it addresses what i perceive to be one of
> the fundamental principles behind the creation of this forum, namely:
> alternatives.
> Grant and Harry are pursuing a cool little project at the pace that
> their busy adult lives allow. Like any real world project, their
> design and methods represent compromises among conflicting
> parameters, ie performance, durability, supportability and
> compatibility with an existing body of application software.
> But there are plenty of other ways to skin this cat and this forum is
> the best one i've encountered for a discussion of those alternatives.
> Some alternatives already exist like the PSIM, MIDIbox.org, and the
> Buchla 300(!) this forum certainly has room for subtopic segmentation.
> (IMHO software would be the best organizing principle for
> segmentation. ie PSIM-compatible, BASICStamp, etc.)
> Harry and Grant seem to be the farthest along on their endeavor but
> that shouldn't discourage anyone from pursuing a different design. I
> believe this forum exists to support their efforts with a free
> exchange of information and provide them with a communication channel
> to interested customers/subscribers.
> i enjoy the good fortune to already have a CVS platform but if
> anything , it makes me more sympathetic to the impatience of those who
> are unable to obtain one. Nevertheless this allows me the luxury of
> waiting until Grant and Harry feel very secure about the robustness of
> their design.
> But that's just me.
> It's a marketplace of ideas here and this is a good place to make
> proposals and see how much traction they get among the readers.
> Specific to the BASICStamp: i've done some hobby robotics with it and
> Parallax is certainly a better established supplier than BasicMicro,
> and the BASICStamp is better supported. i agree that it is a safer
> choice for long term support. I also believe that a processor can't be
> *too* fast , so BasicMicro has an edge there but on the other hand,
> i'm not convinced that the BasicStamp couldn't do a very good job ,
> perhaps in a smaller scale design than Grant did for the BasicAtom.
> i support Grant's and Harry's project simply because it suits my
> particular needs (and my NON-schedule) best but that shouldn't
> discourage anyone from pursuing a different project.
>
> Best,
> -doc
>
>
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com, "John Loffink"
> <jloffink@> wrote:
> >
> > BasicMicro is selling the 28M PRO part on their website and it is
> supported
> > in their software, both for the last six months or longer. Other than
> > publishing a data sheet that shows four more analog inputs, what would
> > constitute a clear indication of their intentions?
> >
> > It is obvious that BasicMicro is a small time operation. That hasn't
> > changed since they brought out their product.
> >
> > If we want to play it safe, then a Parallax BASIC STAMP Product is the
> > obvious way to go, with Parallax having created the BASIC
> microcontroller
> > market. That throws out any PSIM program compatibility though.
> >
> > The Parallax BASIC STAMP top performing products are advertised at
> 12-19,000
> > BASIC instructions per second compared to the ATOMPRO 24/28 at 100,000
> > instructions per second. Would we want to trade off apparent
> performance
> > for potential longevity of supply? That's a valid topic of
> discussion. So
> > is the need for PSIM compatibility.
> >
> > John Loffink
> > The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> > http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> > The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> > http://www.wavemakers-synth.com
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Grant
> Richter
> > >
> > > The problem is that I am not getting a warm fuzzy about Basic Micros
> > > commitment to the
> > > Pro module product line.
> > >
> > > If we go to all this trouble and they discontinue the 28M, where
> are we?
> > >
> > > On the other side, the 50 or so sales of 28M modules that would
> come from
> > > this board,
> > > might be enough to get some momentum behind the 28M product.
> > >
> > > The responsibility falls to the manufacturer to move the product
> forward,
> > > or give a clear
> > > indication of their intentions.
> > >
> >
>

Good timing (for me)... my hardwood floor project should be done
~this~ week.

I never thought I'd say... "DIY Sucks !!!" :^P

H^) harry


Grant Richter wrote:

>
> I guess the consensus is that he 28M is viable.
>
> I will knock out the rest of the design sheets this coming week.
>
> Onward and up ward.
>
> --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:ComputerVoltageSources%40yahoogroups.com>, "drmabuce"
> <drmabuce@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I like John's point in that it addresses what i perceive to be one of
> > the fundamental principles behind the creation of this forum, namely:
> > alternatives.
> > Grant and Harry are pursuing a cool little project at the pace that
> > their busy adult lives allow. Like any real world project, their
> > design and methods represent compromises among conflicting
> > parameters, ie performance, durability, supportability and
> > compatibility with an existing body of application software.
> > But there are plenty of other ways to skin this cat and this forum is
> > the best one i've encountered for a discussion of those alternatives.
> > Some alternatives already exist like the PSIM, MIDIbox.org, and the
> > Buchla 300(!) this forum certainly has room for subtopic segmentation.
> > (IMHO software would be the best organizing principle for
> > segmentation. ie PSIM-compatible, BASICStamp, etc.)
> > Harry and Grant seem to be the farthest along on their endeavor but
> > that shouldn't discourage anyone from pursuing a different design. I
> > believe this forum exists to support their efforts with a free
> > exchange of information and provide them with a communication channel
> > to interested customers/subscribers.
> > i enjoy the good fortune to already have a CVS platform but if
> > anything , it makes me more sympathetic to the impatience of those who
> > are unable to obtain one. Nevertheless this allows me the luxury of
> > waiting until Grant and Harry feel very secure about the robustness of
> > their design.
> > But that's just me.
> > It's a marketplace of ideas here and this is a good place to make
> > proposals and see how much traction they get among the readers.
> > Specific to the BASICStamp: i've done some hobby robotics with it and
> > Parallax is certainly a better established supplier than BasicMicro,
> > and the BASICStamp is better supported. i agree that it is a safer
> > choice for long term support. I also believe that a processor can't be
> > *too* fast , so BasicMicro has an edge there but on the other hand,
> > i'm not convinced that the BasicStamp couldn't do a very good job ,
> > perhaps in a smaller scale design than Grant did for the BasicAtom.
> > i support Grant's and Harry's project simply because it suits my
> > particular needs (and my NON-schedule) best but that shouldn't
> > discourage anyone from pursuing a different project.
> >
> > Best,
> > -doc
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:ComputerVoltageSources%40yahoogroups.com>, "John Loffink"
> > <jloffink@> wrote:
> > >
> > > BasicMicro is selling the 28M PRO part on their website and it is
> > supported
> > > in their software, both for the last six months or longer. Other than
> > > publishing a data sheet that shows four more analog inputs, what would
> > > constitute a clear indication of their intentions?
> > >
> > > It is obvious that BasicMicro is a small time operation. That hasn't
> > > changed since they brought out their product.
> > >
> > > If we want to play it safe, then a Parallax BASIC STAMP Product is the
> > > obvious way to go, with Parallax having created the BASIC
> > microcontroller
> > > market. That throws out any PSIM program compatibility though.
> > >
> > > The Parallax BASIC STAMP top performing products are advertised at
> > 12-19,000
> > > BASIC instructions per second compared to the ATOMPRO 24/28 at 100,000
> > > instructions per second. Would we want to trade off apparent
> > performance
> > > for potential longevity of supply? That's a valid topic of
> > discussion. So
> > > is the need for PSIM compatibility.
> > >
> > > John Loffink
> > > The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
> > > http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com
> <http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com>
> > > The Wavemakers Synthesizer Web Site
> > > http://www.wavemakers-synth.com <http://www.wavemakers-synth.com>
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:ComputerVoltageSources%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > [mailto:ComputerVoltageSources@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:ComputerVoltageSources%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Grant
> > Richter
> > > >
> > > > The problem is that I am not getting a warm fuzzy about Basic Micros
> > > > commitment to the
> > > > Pro module product line.
> > > >
> > > > If we go to all this trouble and they discontinue the 28M, where
> > are we?
> > > >
> > > > On the other side, the 50 or so sales of 28M modules that would
> > come from
> > > > this board,
> > > > might be enough to get some momentum behind the 28M product.
> > > >
> > > > The responsibility falls to the manufacturer to move the product
> > forward,
> > > > or give a clear
> > > > indication of their intentions.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/390 - Release Date: 7/17/06
>