Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChuckMcM | Hacker News Reader

Interesting, I generally have a fairly positive opinion of the Imp. In particular the integration with Squirrel means that much more complex things can be done, more easily, and without touching the running hardware. The Spark (Core) on the other hand is much like an Arduino in that you have it in your presence to code its behavior, and then release it to the wild. Slightly different target apps, hugely different user experience.

That said, this is a pretty interesting price point. I find myself unable to resist ordering a couple :-).

Oh, and to answer your question, when folks say "Spark" they generally think of the "Core" which was $39 (or twice as much) so this really is saying, "hey a new cost reduced version of the Spark core."

View on HN

"The Spark (Core) on the other hand is much like an Arduino in that you have it in your presence to code its behavior, and then release it to the wild. Slightly different target apps, hugely different user experience."

The Core default firmware gives you an instant cloud API to access GPIO pins (r/w). You write code if you need more complex stuff (local control logic, exposing a function as a REST service, publish or subscribe of events...) And you usually flash it remotely. At work [1] we use it to build prototypes for anything that needs network connectivity (we also use Yuns, but it's a completly different paradigm as I see it). I hope the Photon is still open source as the core (hw and firmware)

[1]http://www.globant.com/studios/wearables-internet-things

Electric Imp is trying to patent (something around) using a light and a photo diode for communication. That's not a good sign, but enough about that, the Photon (assuming they actually ship) and its price point are much more interesting to me as a hobbyist. They also have schematics and gerber files for their hardware which is more than I can say for Electric Imp.

> In particular the integration with Squirrel means that much more complex things can be done, more easily, and without touching the running hardware. The Spark (Core) on the other hand is much like an Arduino

Thanks for the clarification, I've never tried Spark before, though I will once mine arrives. :)

How much of the Imp's advantage here is due to features of Squirrel the language itself, and how much is due to their 'cloudification' of the ecosystem?

   > How much of the Imp's advantage here is due to features 
   > of Squirrel the language itself, and how much is due to 
   > their 'cloudification' of the ecosystem?

I believe it all relates to the cloud aspect of it. The systems model is that the Imp is simply an intelligent channel controller at the end of the connection. This gives two advantages, one is that "infinite" state can be kept off chip, and the other is that updates can occur without the modules participation.

I don't doubt that a similar setup could be recreated for the Spark with some standardization on what the Photon expects from the network.

As for the patent, at least what they are trying to patent is actual hardware not some 18th century practice but done with a computer :-)

Just wanted to also add that Imp has gerber files for many of their reference designs and dev boards here:

https://electricimp.com/docs/hardware/resources/reference-de...

I'm looking for a schematic for what's inside the SD-form factor card, which these are not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com