Re: Huge fan of 8bit mirocontrollers but ¿Why XMOS?
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:24 am
mikef, Very interesting to hear from an Arduino user.
I have to ask have you, have you ever heard of the Propeller micro-controller from Parallax Inc.?
That MCU has 8 independent 32 bit processors. The philosophy with the Propeller is similar to that of XMOS, use general purpose processors to implement functionality in software that would otherwise be done in hardware peripherals, e.g. UARTS, SPI, I2C, PWM motor controls etc. Doing things that way means no need for a complicated operating system or any worries about interrupt processing and gets you deterministic timing of your code execution.
The Propeller was exactly designed for the kind of application you are describing, is incredibly easy to use, and has a very enthusiastic support system from Parallax and a similarly enthusiastic following on it's forum. There is a lot of software available for those UARTS, PWM's etc. As a bonus it can output VGA and NTSC video very easily!
Prior to the arrival of the XMOS the Propeller was the only device of this nature generally available for a few dollars.
As a Propeller user for some time I have always wondered, along with many others, what the draw was to the Arduino when there was a much simpler solution at hand. I am curious to hear why the Arduino is so popular in the face of more suitable alternatives. The Atmel is after all just another traditional MCU.
My apologies for bring up a competitors product on this forum. I have been already chastised for mentioning XMOS else where:). By way of mitigation I currently working on a Propeller implementation of the XMOS serial xlink so that these devices can work together each offering what they are best at.
I have to ask have you, have you ever heard of the Propeller micro-controller from Parallax Inc.?
That MCU has 8 independent 32 bit processors. The philosophy with the Propeller is similar to that of XMOS, use general purpose processors to implement functionality in software that would otherwise be done in hardware peripherals, e.g. UARTS, SPI, I2C, PWM motor controls etc. Doing things that way means no need for a complicated operating system or any worries about interrupt processing and gets you deterministic timing of your code execution.
The Propeller was exactly designed for the kind of application you are describing, is incredibly easy to use, and has a very enthusiastic support system from Parallax and a similarly enthusiastic following on it's forum. There is a lot of software available for those UARTS, PWM's etc. As a bonus it can output VGA and NTSC video very easily!
Prior to the arrival of the XMOS the Propeller was the only device of this nature generally available for a few dollars.
As a Propeller user for some time I have always wondered, along with many others, what the draw was to the Arduino when there was a much simpler solution at hand. I am curious to hear why the Arduino is so popular in the face of more suitable alternatives. The Atmel is after all just another traditional MCU.
My apologies for bring up a competitors product on this forum. I have been already chastised for mentioning XMOS else where:). By way of mitigation I currently working on a Propeller implementation of the XMOS serial xlink so that these devices can work together each offering what they are best at.