Hacker News Reader

Comment by jws | Hacker News Reader

Summary for Reference: Smaller package, 1/8th the memory of an Arduino.

2k ROM, 128 bytes of RAM, 10 IO lines, 8 ADC inputs on one variant, 200ksps with sample and hold. Very low power consumption (if you make it work that way).

$0.75 for the microcontroller in volume.

I need to read more about the USB interface. I suspect it can be used to communicate with the serial controller while the chip runs, which with the right software could make it be a nice way to build small USB controlled devices and sensors.

View on HN

Hasn't the MSP430 been out for a while? I recall a devkit that used a USB dongle with the chip mounted on it for around $20.

I know this chip has some traction in low-cost microcontroller work like utility meters, but why try to get this into the Arduino space?

The wikipedia page says that it dates from the 90ies and is modeled after the PDP11. Main differences to AVRs seem to be that they are designed for lower power consumption and are von Neumann instead of Harvard architecture, otherwise it depends on your requirements which processeor fits your needs. For example, the lager controller included in this bundle compares to the Attiny 2312, which has the same amount of RAM and ROM, the same 16MHz maximum clock, more IO-pins, another timer, PWM-channels, some EERPOM and a hardware UART, but higher power consumption and fewer and slower ADCs.

As to why now, I think they are targeting the educational market (there is a special link for universities on the wiki page), trying to get exposure to students who would otherwise default to using arduinos for term projects. They are not selling these boards for profit, but for mindshare.

Cause AVR sucks when it comes to low power applications. Running an MSP430 off three lemons as a battery is completely feasible and Ti has/had videos showing them doing just that.

Yes, the MSP430 has had the USB Fet for a while, but because it is not easy to use in a breadboard it did not have the same appeal. This looks much nicer for that reason.

Why get into the Arduino space? Not everyone is in love with AVR's chips ... this guy here included ;-). Any device that is CHEAP (I'd rather buy this for a class where we are going to blink an LED than an Arduino) and has much more potential knowing the MSP430 architecture.

I was talking about this device today, and a friend in education perked up when she heard the price. The price is low enough that public schools can do stuff with them on regular funds.

THe MSP430 is a fairly popular microprocessor for lots of small applications (that don't have to run an OS).

That's still vary pricy for a low end bulk micro controwler, still you can still do a lot with 128 bytes of RAM and 2k ROM.

Happy hacking ;)

Sample em from Ti. They send the chips out free of charge, they can easily be used for breadboarding. Use a goodFET (http://goodfet.sf.net/) to program it.

I've been having plenty of fun that way for a while now.

Thanks for the tl;dr, I'm left wondering about the state of the software to actually program and deploy code to the device though. From what I saw on HackADay, it appears the two supported IDEs are Windows only (utterly unacceptable, for me). (I know, the gcc port is there, but it's pretty incomplete, from my understanding)

This leaves me, a relative newbie to embedded dev, what kind of pitfalls I'd run into if I tried to purchase one of these.

It's incredibly frustrating, after years of being in a relative comfort zone with the realm of general desktop/server software, to try to learn more about embedded, and then be uncertain as to what materials you even need.

I have the same newbie issues, but it's $4.30. Worst case, it's totally useless to me, and I'm out the cost of a latte.

Cheaper than going to a movie and, for the hacker-minded, almost certain to be at least as entertaining as many movies.

Which is why I'm going to buy it anyway.

|It's incredibly frustrating, after years of being in a relative comfort zone with the realm of general desktop/server software, to try to learn more about embedded, and then be uncertain as to what materials you even need.

That is, to me, one of the greatest feelings in the entire world. I remember being a kid and installing a qbasic compiler for the first time. HOLY CRAP it was like learning magic. There was SO much wonder.

Now it's just work. I know how to make my computer do pretty much whatever I want. Microcontrollers offer me the opportunity to experience that wonder of learning something new again.

I don't think you understand what I was describing as frustrating. Ignorance isn't the problem, it's the uncertainty of tools and "what I need to get started".

I love solving problems, discovering new things, but the whole embedded dev experience is disempowering because a single mistake in ordering can mean waiting days/weeks to resolve a missing part, not clicking to another website for a missing download.

The whole stack lacks the flexibility of software, for obvious reasons, as much as I love it so far.

That's part of what makes it exciting! I was a hardware engineer before switching to software. At that time, we used to say to the software guys "if you guys screw up your design, you recompile; if we screw up, we have to update the schematic, update the cad drawings, order new pcb boards, wait a few weeks, and hope it works next time". The pressure made it fun. Not to mention playing with oscilloscopes and function generators. If it was a minor glitch you could get by by chopping some pins or doing some soldering. Man, that was a good first job out of college. Oh and I'm definitely ordering one of these, even though I haven't used Windows in a few years either. I've got a box with xp somewhere...

He's not frustrated with the unforgivability of hardware design. He's frustrated with the overhead involved in getting started learning the ropes (finding the right tools, learning about the conventions involved in identifying the right parts).

Rule #1 of embedded development is you develop with the tools you have, not the tools you wish you had.

Get a Windows box, or deal with gcc (and ideally help out the developers if it's still got some shortcomings.)

>gcc (and ideally help out the developers if it's still got some shortcomings.)

GCC has a long and storied development environment. I can't exactly just step in and start spewing code at them. It's not an easy culture to penetrate, nor codebase.

>develop with the tools you have, not the tools you wish you had.

I'm actually going to call tough shit on that, and respond with, "buy the dev kit/platform that supports more than one flawed platform"

Regardless, I'm still going to buy a kit.

I'm actually going to call tough shit on that, and respond with, "buy the dev kit/platform that supports more than one flawed platform"

A valid strategy as long as you aren't building a million of something.

I'm a programmer messing around with dev kits. I think building a million of something is a Maserati Problem (TM), at this point.

I feel you on the windows dev environment rejection. Ive completely written off PIC on that basis. One of the shittiest single os development environments ever.

You can use Piklab for Linux. I have developed a complete firmware for a USB device using Piklab.

GCC port works fairly well, yes it takes some finagling to get working correctly, but any self described hacker should be able to do it in a couple of hours.

Not only that, but clang has upcoming MSP430 support, with many supporters already actively attempting to get it functioning correctly in an attempt to replace GCC.

You can buy a USB Bitwhacker from SparkFun, use Piklab for Linux to develop for it (in assembly), and use a command-line tool to flash it over USB (I can't remember the name of the tool). Or, you can buy a PICkit, and program the PIC directly without needing a bootloader.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com