Aha, here’s the key phrase:

So everything’s SPI or I2C or whatever, and they’re offloading everything to the module micros. Wonder what they’re using out there, ATTiny?

Chris says:

[quote]If you want to use the go!bus compatibility logo, you’ll need to use go!bus IO virtualization firmware on your chip (STM8S and STM32 supported soon, AVR and others hopefully supported in the future). It does fun things like let us know how much power you need and lets you build a super-low-cost-module with both tons of intelligence and plug and play ease.

BTW, the STM8S chips are thirty-something-cents in reels. I kid you not.[/quote]

So basically every Go module is daisy link module.

Getting more interesting by the minute. Damn shame they decided to use the same plug & cable though…


I think they used the same cables to get access to the some of the gadgeteer modules. (at least the S-U-X ones)

::slight_smile: Boy S-U-X sure is a unfortunate letter combination.

You guys are forgetting about the great gadgeteer core provided by Microsoft and the drivers we provide with modules. You can connect the module to an arduino if you wanted but you lost the designer, the core and the drivers.

Modules are nothing new, they have been around for ages. What gadgeteer does is in adding software and specialized sockets while it is still very safe to misplace modules.

Virtualised pins sound good. It is what gadgeteer calla daisylink. But this come at preformance penalties. Speaking of daisy link, you can have many on one socket, over 10 if you want!

Another fork from our original [italic]NETMF for STM32[/italic] for the STM32F1 :slight_smile:

Almost exactly one month after Gus told me about the GHI fork, it was kind of deja vue yesterday when Chris told me about the SecretLabs fork :smiley:

Anyway, I am glad that the new Netduino Go has at least two true Gadgeteer sockets.


Oberon microsystems, Inc.

Even if the go!bus slave MCUs are $0.30 in reels, it’s an added cost, added design complexity, more software for potential bugs, and more power used.

You’re also introducing more latency into things like interrupt inputs and ADC readings (mainboard says “read ADC” -> potentially wait for bus availability -> send SPI command -> potentially wait for bus availability -> receive SPI response -> ADC reading available). The technology has upsides and downsides.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s an extremely interesting prototyping/hobby platform (I like how any socket can have any function), but there’s no clear prototype -> production path here. You’re really abstracting away everything that makes the microcontroller a microcontroller, at that point.

It’s not for me for the same reasons Gadgeteer isn’t for me (even more so, in this case… Cerberus is tempting me oh-so-much), but I definitely see the appeal and understand the potential.

@ godifroy check back next week. We got something for you. I am sure we can get your blessing with next one :slight_smile:

I like the unified sockets but agree with the downsides godefroi pointed out. Another nice and simple feature are those LED next to each socket. Gadgeteer could use that in a way that LED is turned on when the socket is in use. Right now when you connect a module to a socket it will receive power but it’s hard to tell if the program running on mainboard is actualy using it. The gadgeteer core could simply control those LEDs to signal if the socket is used by the program.

I agree with Gralin on the led’s it makes sense and I have to admit it does look cool.

I’ve bought two MCUs in the last few weeks (Cerb40 and CANxtra)! I’m going to have to work some serious magic to get another approved ;D

Do what I do, get them delivered to the office then bring them home without any boxes and squirrel them away into the project box. Then you can answer the question of “hi honey what’s that? Is it something new?” with the true answer of “it’s just something from my project box I had and wanted to do something with”

I’m sure my wife does the same with shoes/clothes/handbags/random lady equipment I’ve never seen before. :slight_smile:

@ HughB

Wait…your wife calls you “homey”? :wink:

Been watching the Simpsons too much, methinks.

That’s genius! Delivery to the office… in fact, I could just keep my stuff in the car… convert it into a mobile electronics lab.

Hmm, ideas…

@ godefroi - upgrade to a conversion van! It would have room to sit up straight while “at the bench”

Wow, I could do some stuff with that.

I was somewhat surprised by this, but not entirely as it confirms the design and advantages of Gadgeteer and frankly either Netduino changed or died (or at least died a slow death of a shrinking user community while people switched to Gadgeteer, note Gadgeteer isn’t just growing because it is swiping Netduino users, but because software guys who are new to device development are able to hit the ground running with Gadgeteer which they can’t do with Netduino, and with users comes hardware sales so positive upward spiral time for everyone), but I’m not sure this design is going to save them as I tend to agree with @ godefroi assessment of this new platform and what makes a device. How important is it to be able to connect gobs of modules vs performance vs costs vs flexibility vs prototype to production vs power consumption etc and the question becomes one of balance and I don’t think Netduino Go has as good of balance as Gadgeteer does and in some ways I’m rather ticked that they lined themselves up so closely to Gadgeteer, cables, sockets, logo, etc, but really this is a case of imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but still its like having your dorky kid brother try to dress like you.

I wish them all the best, but I’m happy to stay in the Gadgeteer camp and wear the fez as I think Gadgeteer is going to outlast and out perform Netduino Go and I wouldn’t be surprised if they eventually have to take the next step beyond imitation and just fully embrace the Gadgeteer standard.

@ Duke Nukem

Good point on balance!

@ HughB

To be honest, I think it is waste of power and real estate

We can add LEDs to the next board but you tell me, do you want another socket or 2 vs have led by every socket. Look at cerbuino scenarios for example. We used every single pin including the brag pins so you have full access to the processor. And when you are ready for production, there is nothing to change beside removing the cables.