.NET Gadgeteer Light

Archive
61

[quote]Still, I think the new changes made to 4.2 will allow it to run on panda[/quote]So the panda will get 4.2 support at some point? Good to know you’re still working on the older hardware :slight_smile:

[quote]Sure, I’m quite capable of writing a new driver for the OBD-II module but do I really want to spend all weekend doing that when an excellent driver already exists that has been well tested?[/quote]That’s exactly my point too.

Of course, this piece of software isn’t useful for everyone, but it can be for a few people, including myself. That’s why I wrote it. I’ve put it on codeplex for versioning. Actually it wasn’t even my purpose to let it come out like this. It’s not even 100% finished. But Jay Jay found it in it’s early state and posted it here :wink:

I like the discussion that’s going on about Gadgeteer Light though. I just hope I could get clear why I made this, and why it’s useful for some (but not all) .NETMF folks :slight_smile:

62

I know I’m the trouble maker… :smiley:

63

Frankly a lot of this discussion is a bit of we didn’t invent it so we don’t like it. :frowning: I hope that isn’t the case, but that is the vibe I’m getting.

I have the deepest respect for GHI and Secret Labs and I see pros and cons to both Gadgeteer and Go. I’m a software guy and I really appreciate how both platforms let me dabble in electronics without a steep learning curve. I like the Go because I don’t have to even think about socket types and I like the Gadgeteer because rich ecosystem that already exists and the broad support that GHI offers. Mostly it is the modules that determine which platform I’m going to use, if they are available on both then I guess I would go with whatever is cheaper.

Also, I love what Pete is planning with his Midi module where he is going to support both platforms.

Anything that move .NETMF, .NET and C# forward is great in my book.

-Eric