Accelerometer | ADC | ADXL | Adxl20 | AVR | BasicStamp | BX-35 | BX28 | BX35 | COM3 | Compiler | Downloader | EEPROM | Electromagnet | GetADC | GP2D1 | GPS | I2C | IDE | Keypad | LCD | LCD+ | MIDI | Motors | Multitasking | Netmedia | Networking | PCB | PID | PlaySound | PWM | Relays | RTC | Servo | ShiftOut | SitePlayer | SPI | Stack | Timer | USB

I am an active Stamp user and just read a post on the Basic Stamp group about BasicX. I spent a good hour on the BasicX.com and browsed over lots of the documentation. It sounds impressive and it promisses lots of what I always wished for in the BS2. Is this for real or is it too good to be true? Here are some important other questions: 1) how easy to communicate with RS232 devices using the BasicX? It is really easy with the Stamp. 2) how useful is the project board? It is listed for $20 but not sure if it is adaptable to many projects. 3) how real is the multitasking aspect of the BasicX? 4) How is the support quality from NetMedia? 5) Is there lots of third party literature out there? 6) How come I never heard about it on any of the electronics magazines like Nuts and Volts? 7) Why does NetMedia promote the fact that the BasicX is pin-to-pin compatible with the BS2? Hope some of you can take a minute and shed some light on these questions. Based on your answers, I may make the committment and switch from the BS2 for good! Al Najjar

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

--- wrote: > I am an active Stamp user and just read a post on the Basic Stamp > group about BasicX. I spent a good hour on the BasicX.com and > browsed over lots of the documentation. It sounds impressive and it > promisses lots of what I always wished for in the BS2. > > Is this for real or is it too good to be true? > > Here are some important other questions: > > 1) how easy to communicate with RS232 devices using the BasicX? It > is > really easy with the Stamp. it is also very easy. > 2) how useful is the project board? It is listed for $20 but not > sure > if it is adaptable to many projects. I found it to be usefull. > 3) how real is the multitasking aspect of the BasicX? very read. there is more dead time in your code than you think. this is used to switch tasks. the limit for tasks is the stack that you define for it. if the task is complex then it requires a larger stack, there by reducing the number of tasks that you can have running. > 4) How is the support quality from NetMedia? it is ok, your best and quickest support is from this group. many knolagable people here to help. > 5) Is there lots of third party literature out there? nope > 6) How come I never heard about it on any of the electronics > magazines > like Nuts and Volts? that is where I head of it about 1.5 years ago. > 7) Why does NetMedia promote the fact that the BasicX is pin-to-pin > compatible with the BS2? to win people like you of course. a plug in replacment for the stamp that is multi tasking and MUCH faster. > Hope some of you can take a minute and shed some light on these > questions. Based on your answers, I may make the committment and > switch from the BS2 for good! > > Al Najjar ===== Tony Brenke North Tacoma, WA __________________________________________________

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

I switched Al about a yr ago, and now wonder how I survived without the BX24. neil Tony Brenke wrote: > --- wrote: > > I am an active Stamp user and just read a post on the Basic Stamp > > group about BasicX. I spent a good hour on the BasicX.com and > > browsed over lots of the documentation. It sounds impressive and it > > > promisses lots of what I always wished for in the BS2. > > > > Is this for real or is it too good to be true? > > > > Here are some important other questions: > > > > 1) how easy to communicate with RS232 devices using the BasicX? It > > is > > really easy with the Stamp. > > it is also very easy. > > > 2) how useful is the project board? It is listed for $20 but not > > sure > > if it is adaptable to many projects. > I found it to be usefull. > > > 3) how real is the multitasking aspect of the BasicX? > very read. there is more dead time in your code than you think. > this is used to switch tasks. > > the limit for tasks is the stack that you define for it. > if the task is complex then it requires a larger stack, there by > reducing the number of tasks that you can have running. > > > 4) How is the support quality from NetMedia? > it is ok, your best and quickest support is from this group. > many knolagable people here to help. > > > 5) Is there lots of third party literature out there? > nope > > > 6) How come I never heard about it on any of the electronics > > magazines > > like Nuts and Volts? > that is where I head of it about 1.5 years ago. > > > 7) Why does NetMedia promote the fact that the BasicX is pin-to-pin > > compatible with the BS2? > to win people like you of course. > a plug in replacment for the stamp that is multi tasking and MUCH > faster. > > > > > Hope some of you can take a minute and shed some light on these > > questions. Based on your answers, I may make the committment and > > switch from the BS2 for good! > > > > Al Najjar > ===== > Tony Brenke > North Tacoma, WA > > __________________________________________________ > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT You can, too! Start here... Height: 345678ft 01234567891011in Weight: lbs.kg. > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi, I once looked into the bx24 but rejected it because it only allowed 1 serial channel (named COM3) which has to be opened and closed. So to use serial I/O on multiple pins this COM3 must be closed and re-opened for other pins to use, whereas the stamp allowes serial I/O on-the-fly on every pin. Perhaps someone can explain this COM3 behaviour. Is it possible I missed something and multiple open serial channels are available? regards, peter

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

I've got four serial devices running on a single bx24 simultaneously without any problems. True, they happen one at a time, but to all intents and purposes, because they are LCDs, "simultaneously" Peter Verkaik wrote: > Hi, > > I once looked into the bx24 but rejected it because it only allowed 1 > serial > channel (named COM3) which has to be opened and closed. So to use > serial I/O > on multiple pins this COM3 must be closed and re-opened for other pins > to > use, whereas the stamp allowes serial I/O on-the-fly on every pin. > Perhaps someone can explain this COM3 behaviour. Is it possible I > missed > something and multiple open serial channels are available? > > regards, peter > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT [Lose 20 lbs by November 12th] > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Peter, The BX-24 has 2 com ports (Com1 and Com3). Com1 is dedicated to pins 1&2 whereas Com3 can be assigned to any I/O pins. Yes, the BX-24 does require 1 extra line of code to reassign Com3 to a new set of pins but seeing as how the BX-24 is 65x faster and has 16x more user code space than any Stamp, I don't think that one line of code would make much of a difference in your BX-24 applications performance. Chris > I once looked into the bx24 but rejected it because it only allowed 1 > serial > channel (named COM3) which has to be opened and closed. So to use serial > I/O > on multiple pins this COM3 must be closed and re-opened for other pins > to > use, whereas the stamp allowes serial I/O on-the-fly on every pin. > Perhaps someone can explain this COM3 behaviour. Is it possible I missed > something and multiple open serial channels are available? > > regards, peter

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

I tend to agree. does the bx have some querks? yes is it better than the stamp for what I want to do? yes what I do with the bx would be imposable on a stamp. and the speed of the bx is so much greater that I had never thought of using a stamp to begin with. bx-01 with ram pack 64K of memory. rs485 network running at 460.8 k baud to another bx-01. a stamp just can't touch that. --- Chris Harriman <> wrote: > Peter, > > The BX-24 has 2 com ports (Com1 and Com3). Com1 is > dedicated to pins 1&2 whereas Com3 can be assigned to > any I/O pins. Yes, the BX-24 does require 1 extra line of > code to reassign Com3 to a new set of pins but seeing as > how the BX-24 is 65x faster and has 16x more user > code space than any Stamp, I don't think that one line of > code would make much of a difference in your BX-24 > applications performance. > > Chris > > > > I once looked into the bx24 but rejected it because it only allowed > 1 > > serial > > channel (named COM3) which has to be opened and closed. So to use > serial > > I/O > > on multiple pins this COM3 must be closed and re-opened for other > pins > > to > > use, whereas the stamp allowes serial I/O on-the-fly on every pin. > > Perhaps someone can explain this COM3 behaviour. Is it possible I > missed > > something and multiple open serial channels are available? > > > > regards, peter > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ===== Tony Brenke North Tacoma, WA __________________________________________________

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi Peter, I think that both the BasicStamp and the BX-24 only allow serial input via one pin at a time. With the Stamp, you tell it to wait for input on some pin for so many seconds, and it has useful functions like waiting for a particular string to show up via this port. With the BX-24, you will find that re-asigning the serial (Com3) port to another pin is as easy as with the Stamp, with an added advantage: queues. With them, you can input data via the serial port, while your program is doing other things. With the Stamp, I found that unless the serial port reading line was executed repeatedly very fast, you would risk loosing data, so you couldn't have a lot of code executing in your main prog loop if you also had to wait for data from the port. Basically, you have to change your way of viewing serial comms handling, and then you'll be able to see how much more powerful the BX-24 is in this sense. I also admit that, if you come from a BasicStamp background, it may be more difficult to adapt to the BX, as you tend to apply the same logic when coding, which won't work - believe me. I suppose that if you come in fresh to the BX-24, you'll just learn it, you don't have to learn it AND change your way of programming. I hope this helps, all the best, Mike > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Peter Verkaik [mailto:] > Enviado el: viernes, 07 de septiembre de 2001 0:04 > Para: > Asunto: RE: [BasicX] Convert! > Hi, > > I once looked into the bx24 but rejected it because it only > allowed 1 serial > channel (named COM3) which has to be opened and closed. So to use > serial I/O > on multiple pins this COM3 must be closed and re-opened for other pins to > use, whereas the stamp allowes serial I/O on-the-fly on every pin. > Perhaps someone can explain this COM3 behaviour. Is it possible I missed > something and multiple open serial channels are available? > > regards, peter

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hiya, Speaking as a longtime Stamp user (and Still am!) The BX24 is a very cool product. Thusly: wrote: [snip] > Is this for real or is it too good to be true? > > Here are some important other questions: > > 1) how easy to communicate with RS232 devices using the BasicX? It is > really easy with the Stamp. Slightly more complex than the Stamp but still trivial. > 2) how useful is the project board? It is listed for $20 but not sure I always make my own, I've never used anyone else's carriers. > 3) how real is the multitasking aspect of the BasicX? Very real. Very workable. You have to knuckle out your stack usage, but even that isn't too hard. I've got a 'bot running 4 tasks that works just fine. Depending on what you do, you might also want to learn about semaphores. ;-) This is the BX's best selling point. > 4) How is the support quality from NetMedia? Its quite adequate - Nothing beats the Stamp, but NetMedia is quite responsive. > 5) Is there lots of third party literature out there? No where near as much as for the Stamp, but what is out there is very good quality. Check out Peter Anderson's site and this group too. > 6) How come I never heard about it on any of the electronics magazines > like Nuts and Volts? Its a smaller company I think and BX is not their whole product line. > 7) Why does NetMedia promote the fact that the BasicX is pin-to-pin > compatible with the BS2? I should think that this is obvious? Who is the 800 pound gorilla in the embedded processor world? DLC -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- * Dennis Clark Mechanical Engineering Behavior Based Robotics * * www.verinet.com/~dlc Colorado State University * ---------------------------------------------------------------------

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

--- In basicx@y..., "Peter Verkaik" <peterverkaik@b...> wrote: > Hi, > > I once looked into the bx24 but rejected it because it only allowed 1 serial > channel (named COM3) which has to be opened and closed. So to use serial I/O > on multiple pins this COM3 must be closed and re-opened for other pins to > use, whereas the stamp allowes serial I/O on-the-fly on every pin. > Perhaps someone can explain this COM3 behaviour. Is it possible I missed > something and multiple open serial channels are available? > > regards, peter Funny but... I moved from the stamp to the BX24 BECAUSE OF the serial support - there are two serial ports, not one (COM1 and COM3) and they can both be true full duplex, not alternating simplex like the stamp serial ports. I had problems with the Stamp missing response messages which arrived before it had a chance to issue a "READ" for them. With the COM ports on the BX-24, this is not an issue. Still not optimal, but it works better for me than the Stamp did. Chuck

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

--- In basicx@y..., "Chris Harriman" <chrish@n...> wrote: > Peter, ..... Yes, the BX-24 does require 1 extra line of > code to reassign Com3 to a new set of pins but seeing as > how the BX-24 is 65x faster and has 16x more user > code space than any Stamp, I don't think that one line of > code would make much of a difference in your BX-24 > applications performance. Whoa!!! Where did these statistics come from????? Are there some facts that support these numbers? Even the wildest, most optimistic estimates of the BX-24 performance that I have seen don't come close to 65X or 16X. Could you provide some backup for these numbers???? Chuck

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi, Pardon me if this question has been answered before... When writing a program that runs several different tasks I need to allocate stack space for each task. Is there any way to calculate the precise amount of stack to allocate? I've had to resort to reducing combinations of working allocations until things stop functioning, then putting some back. Not the best way, I think. Thanks, -B Bob Tilden High Energy Physics Group Northwestern University

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

I'm not positive precisely how the BX24 works, but in most languages you can precisely count the stack space... but it takes some discipline. Each variable requires stack space equal to that variable. That's pretty easy. The state (i.e. what line you're on) needs to be saved; this isn't needed in the BX24, since this comes out of the top (implicit) stack for the state engine. Now the tricky bit... There are implied variables. They have to be counted too, if they don't fit in registers. Here's an example: (in C format, since it's easier for me to think in...) if (((a/2) > (b*3))&&(a*2)>(b/3)) .... This should all fit in the available registers, but what if they're nested or you have more of them? The amount (a/2) must be stored while (b*3) is calculated, and then the result of comparison must be stored while the same thing is done on the other side. Complex math has the same impact.. including anything using Exp calls, for example. Also, all subroutine (function) calls require stack. Specifically, the current line number and registers need room for saving. This is IN ADDITION to the implicit stack mentioned at the top, because this effectively serves as a state engine for returning from the subroutine. So while you certainly -could- calculate how much stack is needed, it's a LOT of work. It's a lot easier just to make an educated guess, raise it a bit, and try it. Regards At 12:00 PM 9/7/01 -0500, Robert Tilden wrote: >Hi, > >Pardon me if this question has been answered before... > >When writing a program that runs several different tasks I need to allocate >stack space for each task. Is there any way to calculate the precise amount >of stack to allocate? I've had to resort to reducing combinations of >working allocations until things stop functioning, then putting some back. >Not the best way, I think. > >Thanks, >-B >Bob Tilden >High Energy Physics Group >Northwestern University

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> --- In basicx@y..., "Chris Harriman" <chrish@n...> wrote: > > Peter, > ...... Yes, the BX-24 does require 1 extra line of > > code to reassign Com3 to a new set of pins but seeing as > > how the BX-24 is 65x faster and has 16x more user > > code space than any Stamp, I don't think that one line of > > code would make much of a difference in your BX-24 > > applications performance. > > Whoa!!! Where did these statistics come from????? Are there some > facts that support these numbers? Even the wildest, most optimistic > estimates of the BX-24 performance that I have seen don't come close > to 65X or 16X. > > Could you provide some backup for these numbers???? Check the websites. The Stamp site says the Stamp II does 4000 instructions per second, the IISX does 10,000 per second. The BX24 (for instance) is said to do 65,000 instructions per second. You can count on both companies using their fastest executing instruction to time this and neither will be an average over all their instructions - I know for a fact that some Stamp commands are faster than others, I assume this is so for the BX chips as well. So, we take 65,000/4000 = 16.25 or 16 times faster, down to 6.5 times faster for the IISX comparison. The BX24 (for instance) has 32K of instructions space, the Stamp II has 2K, = 16 times more space in the BX24. The Stamp IISX has 8 2K segments that can more-or-less cooperate between each other using mailboxes for shared data, even so the BX24 has 2 times the memory of the Stamp IISX, but in reality the BX24 has a linear address space, the Stamp IISX does not. Lets now look at variable space, the BX24 has about 400 bytes that is used for stack and variables. The Stamp II has 32 Bytes to use for var space The IISX has about 90 bytes, but the var space over 32 Bytes is really mailbox RAM that is accessed like you would EEPROM, not like a real var. The BX24 has maybe 12 times the var space, sorta, your use of tasks will suck up RAM VERY quickly though. The BX24 has the Stamp whupped on pure specs, but like PC specs, they really don't tell the whole story. Stamps have some sophisticated pre-processing abilities for some of their instructions that the BX24 does not have. Also, you can't lockup your Stamp like you can the BX24 chip if you goof. However, the multitasking support on the BX24 is way-cool and works very well. Some reasons for all this is the PIC that the Stamp is based on only has about 128Bytes of RAM internal, the 90S8535 that the BX24 is based on has 512 bytes of internal RAM. The EEPROM that instructions are stored in on the Stamp is I2C based and the EEPROM for the BX24 is SPI. SPI is an order of magnitude faster for serial data transfer than I2C is. So these speeds and capacities are not out of line with what is to be expected between the two platforms. Both are good platforms, both are cool. Either is better for some things than the other. Caveat Emptor, YMMV. DLC -- ---------------------------------------------- Dennis Clark http://www.verinet.com/~dlc/botlinks.htm ----------------------------------------------

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Whoops. You are correct, I glossed over the 65X thing. I'm not in love with any of them myself. I like all of them though. The Stamp is my first "love" and I know it well. It just hasn't aged well into the more "modern" day stuff we do. The BX is more of a cutting edge platform in its functionality. On the other hand, the Stamp is still the best starter chip and is a good jumping off point to move up to the more complex and difficult BX chips - Difficult for the newcomer to embedded, I find it not difficult at all to use. DLC > --- In basicx@y..., dlc@v... wrote: > > > --- In basicx@y..., "Chris Harriman" <chrish@n...> wrote: > > > > Peter, > > > ...... Yes, the BX-24 does require 1 extra line of > > > > code to reassign Com3 to a new set of pins but seeing as > > > > how the BX-24 is 65x faster and has 16x more user > > > > code space than any Stamp, I don't think that one line of > > > > code would make much of a difference in your BX-24 > > > > applications performance. > > > > > > Whoa!!! Where did these statistics come from????? Are there some > > > facts that support these numbers? Even the wildest, most > optimistic > > > estimates of the BX-24 performance that I have seen don't come > close > > > to 65X or 16X. > > > > > > Could you provide some backup for these numbers???? > > > > Check the websites. The Stamp site says the Stamp II does 4000 > instructions > > per second, the IISX does 10,000 per second. The BX24 (for > instance) is said > > to do 65,000 instructions per second. You can count on both > companies using > > their fastest executing instruction to time this and neither will > be an average > > over all their instructions - I know for a fact that some Stamp > commands are > > faster than others, I assume this is so for the BX chips as well. > So, we take > > 65,000/4000 = 16.25 or 16 times faster, down to 6.5 times faster > for the IISX > > comparison. The BX24 (for instance) has 32K of instructions space, > the Stamp II > > has 2K, = 16 times more space in the BX24. The Stamp IISX has 8 2K > segments > > that can more-or-less cooperate between each other using mailboxes > for shared > > data, even so the BX24 has 2 times the memory of the Stamp IISX, > but in reality > > the BX24 has a linear address space, the Stamp IISX does not. Lets > now look > > at variable space, the BX24 has about 400 bytes that is used for > stack and > > variables. The Stamp II has 32 Bytes to use for var space The IISX > has about > > 90 bytes, but the var space over 32 Bytes is really mailbox RAM > that is > > accessed like you would EEPROM, not like a real var. The BX24 has > maybe > > 12 times the var space, sorta, your use of tasks will suck up RAM > VERY quickly > > though. > > The BX24 has the Stamp whupped on pure specs, but like PC specs, > they really > > don't tell the whole story. Stamps have some sophisticated pre- > processing > > abilities for some of their instructions that the BX24 does not > have. Also, > > you can't lockup your Stamp like you can the BX24 chip if you > goof. However, > > the multitasking support on the BX24 is way-cool and works very > well. > > Some reasons for all this is the PIC that the Stamp is based on > only has > > about 128Bytes of RAM internal, the 90S8535 that the BX24 is based > on has > > 512 bytes of internal RAM. The EEPROM that instructions are stored > in on > > the Stamp is I2C based and the EEPROM for the BX24 is SPI. SPI is > an order > > of magnitude faster for serial data transfer than I2C is. So these > speeds > > and capacities are not out of line with what is to be expected > between the > > two platforms. > > > > Both are good platforms, both are cool. Either is better for some > things > > than the other. Caveat Emptor, YMMV. > > > > DLC > > -- > > ---------------------------------------------- > > Dennis Clark dlc@v... > > http://www.verinet.com/~dlc/botlinks.htm > > ---------------------------------------------- > > So by your own numbers, the best comparison is 16x faster, NOT 65x > faster, and that is comparing the BX-24 to the old Stamp II; while > the number is 6.5, NOT 65x when you compare it to the Stamp IISX. By > the way, the program size should be based on BASIC instructions > stored, not BYTES - the compactness of the tokens generated by the > compiler has a big impact on actual program size in memory. > > I understand your comments and I also know that the the BX-24 number > is based on an optimized X=X+1 instruction, not a real instruction > mix; I have no idea what the Stamp number is based on, but it's > probably something similar. My point was that the comment about 65x > faster was totally off base. > > I'm not defending the Stamp, 'cause I'm not in love with it either, > just trying to make sure we're dealing with facts. Perhaps Chris just > left out the decimal point???? ;-) > > Chuck >

(You need to be a member of basicx -- send a blank email to basicx-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )