4 ms·

If you want to collect a few sensor readings and don't want to learn an entire new stack...just use Arduino. Yes it's "learning a new stack" but honestly I bet

If you want to collect a few sensor readings and don't want to learn an entire new stack...just use Arduino. Yes it's "learning a new stack" but honestly I bet it's easier than getting Linux to run on something it shouldn't be running on.

benj111 7y ago
"something it shouldn't be running on" That's not a law of nature though. Linus Torvalds hasn't decreed "thou shall not run this on an MCU". If it runs on an MCU that's fine. Theres a rich history of using computers for things they weren't designed for. Id agree though, Arduino is in general the way to go, but STM32 is cheaper than Arduino and it depends what you're wanting to do.
- tyingq 7y ago
  "STM32 is cheaper than Arduino" Wait, what? Did you mean the opposite?
  - vardump 7y ago
    Some STM32 chips can go below $0.50 (?). Not chips like in the article, though. Quick Digikey search came up with $0.83 for STM32L011F4U6TR (32 MHz Cortex M0+, 16 kB program memory, 2 kB data RAM, 512 bytes EEPROM). Atmels ("Arduinos") were a bit cheaper in general, but then again it's hard to compare MCUs without application requirements in mind. Like if I needed 32 MHz Cortex M0+ class performance, comparable Atmels would be more expensive (I think). The conclusion is, either one can be cheaper. Depends on the requirements.
    - tyingq 7y ago
      I'm assuming other needed BOM parts. You can do the Arduino thing with very few parts. A low end STM32 with KB of ram isn't going to boot Linux. The cost comparison of "STM32 that can reasonably run Linux" vs "Atmel that can reasonably run Arduino" is a chasm.
    - benj111 7y ago
      I was talking dev boards not bare chips. If you're going with an MCU that's uses Linux because you don't want to learn another platform you aren't the demographic to be buying bare chips. Can you even get bare stm32s in hand solderable form factors???
      - vardump 7y ago
        > If you're going with an MCU that's uses Linux because you don't want to learn another platform you aren't the demographic to be buying bare chips. Say, you have an existing prototype running on Linux and production ready (or nearly) hardware. Porting it to another platform might delay the launch and make you go out of business. Just playing devil's advocate.
        tyingq 7y ago
        The other choice is SOC setups that are already proven with uCLinux, like the various chips used in home routers. Also minus MMU, etc, but with dev boards that already have reasonable amounts of RAM and proven field success. That's why I'm confused with this project. FriendlyARM, for example, already has cheap uCLinux proven boards with a bundled display, which seems to be what this is trying to be. I'm assuming this project was just a personal "itch to scratch", which is cool, but doesn't make it generally useful.
        vardump 7y ago
        Yes, there are "better" choices, but perhaps not within product budget. Or perhaps missing some I/O feature, like high frequency ADC channels. Or any other parameter you need to optimize for. When you're making 100 000 gadgets, you really have to think about BoM. > ... uCLinux proven boards with a bundled display, which seems to be what this is trying to be. I don't see any reason to think that's what this projects tries to be? Just because some dev board happened to have a display? > I'm assuming this project was just a personal "itch to scratch", which is cool, but doesn't make it generally useful. Now, I don't see a need to personally use this project in production. But I don't either think it's outlandish if someone else does. In the end, nothing is generally useful in the embedded space, it's all just smaller and smaller niches.

benj111 7y ago

"something it shouldn't be running on" That's not a law of nature though. Linus Torvalds hasn't decreed "thou shall not run this on an MCU". If it runs on an MCU that's fine. Theres a rich history of using computers for things they weren't designed for. Id agree though, Arduino is in general the way to go, but STM32 is cheaper than Arduino and it depends what you're wanting to do.

tyingq 7y ago
"STM32 is cheaper than Arduino" Wait, what? Did you mean the opposite?
- vardump 7y ago
  Some STM32 chips can go below $0.50 (?). Not chips like in the article, though. Quick Digikey search came up with $0.83 for STM32L011F4U6TR (32 MHz Cortex M0+, 16 kB program memory, 2 kB data RAM, 512 bytes EEPROM). Atmels ("Arduinos") were a bit cheaper in general, but then again it's hard to compare MCUs without application requirements in mind. Like if I needed 32 MHz Cortex M0+ class performance, comparable Atmels would be more expensive (I think). The conclusion is, either one can be cheaper. Depends on the requirements.
  - tyingq 7y ago
    I'm assuming other needed BOM parts. You can do the Arduino thing with very few parts. A low end STM32 with KB of ram isn't going to boot Linux. The cost comparison of "STM32 that can reasonably run Linux" vs "Atmel that can reasonably run Arduino" is a chasm.
  - benj111 7y ago
    I was talking dev boards not bare chips. If you're going with an MCU that's uses Linux because you don't want to learn another platform you aren't the demographic to be buying bare chips. Can you even get bare stm32s in hand solderable form factors???
    - vardump 7y ago
      > If you're going with an MCU that's uses Linux because you don't want to learn another platform you aren't the demographic to be buying bare chips. Say, you have an existing prototype running on Linux and production ready (or nearly) hardware. Porting it to another platform might delay the launch and make you go out of business. Just playing devil's advocate.
      - tyingq 7y ago
        The other choice is SOC setups that are already proven with uCLinux, like the various chips used in home routers. Also minus MMU, etc, but with dev boards that already have reasonable amounts of RAM and proven field success. That's why I'm confused with this project. FriendlyARM, for example, already has cheap uCLinux proven boards with a bundled display, which seems to be what this is trying to be. I'm assuming this project was just a personal "itch to scratch", which is cool, but doesn't make it generally useful.
        vardump 7y ago
        Yes, there are "better" choices, but perhaps not within product budget. Or perhaps missing some I/O feature, like high frequency ADC channels. Or any other parameter you need to optimize for. When you're making 100 000 gadgets, you really have to think about BoM. > ... uCLinux proven boards with a bundled display, which seems to be what this is trying to be. I don't see any reason to think that's what this projects tries to be? Just because some dev board happened to have a display? > I'm assuming this project was just a personal "itch to scratch", which is cool, but doesn't make it generally useful. Now, I don't see a need to personally use this project in production. But I don't either think it's outlandish if someone else does. In the end, nothing is generally useful in the embedded space, it's all just smaller and smaller niches.