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

>So I guess the questions I'd ask you are: >1. You want it to be a growing product, but what features would you >add? And would you accept a cost impact? >2. How is the documentation insufficiently extensive? With the hundreds >of pages and all the sample code included, what was left off? My earlier post (below) doesn't indicate dissatisfaction with the BasicX, I've ordered dozens. That doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. My concern for the future is that I do like the BasicX, have some investment in time in using it, and am rooting for it's continued success both as a product and in the market place. Thanks to Ron for pointing out the Circuit Cellar ad, I subscribe but haven't opened this month's issue yet. As to the above questions: 1. I didn't ask for a growing product, I expressed concern about the long-term viability of the product, as I thought was evidenced by the company apparently not promoting it. However, the features that I'd like added, or modified, are many of those that have been talked about on this group. I'd like a processor that doesn't constantly fail to accept a download. This is the single most annoying feature to my students. (I'd say it's like a vending machine that you put money in and doesn't dispense a product and takes repeated coaxing and abuse before returning your money.) I'd also like to have a simpler way to do serial communication, like the Stamp serial in/out commands. I'd like to know if the BasicX SPI works; I've seen a lot of indication on this group that it may not, or only does for those with knowledge of the underlying Atmel processor. I'd like the compiler to do some checking so that stacks and queues don't cause memory problems. 2. Saying the documentation is sufficient is like saying the data sheet for a PIC is all you need to program it. I started this way and one can do it but it's not the way to proceed, IMHO, if one wants more market share. The BasicX made considerable appeal in it's earlier adds to being a cost-effective replacement for the Basic Stamp with more powerful features and it's true. The Stamp is a dinosaur in comparison. So why does it continue to have huge success? One of the reasons is the documentation. I started with the Stamp when the company started and there is a huge difference between the original and the present documentation. True the BasicX probably has a more skilled, on average, user base but that's not a reason not to have more complete documentation, more code examples, a list of common applications (I'm aware of the App Notes and use them). I shouldn't have to make this disclaimer but will. IMO the BasicX is a far superior product to the Basic Stamp. That's not the issue and shouldn't be made one. John Piccirillo > > I teach a class, as a part-time university instructor, in which > >students design mobile robots for various contests. > >The processor we use for the small robots is the > >BX-24. Despite the excellent activity on the BasicX > >list, and the updating of the compiler, I'm concerned > >about the future of the processor because I don't see it > >advertised anywhere and am curious. Is Netmedia > >carrying the BX-24 as a legacy product? Are units > >manufactured to meet demand or are we drawing upon > >an initial stockpile? I don't expect an answer revealing > >company strategy. Several times list contributors have > >commented on the desire for more extensive documentation. > >Can we expect this? My feeling is that if the BX is not > >a growing product, there will be no third party documentation. > > > > Not to be negative, I think the BX is an excellent product > >and just the right combination of capability, cost, and > >complexity for sophisticated projects, even for unsophisticated > >users. [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 )

> the BasicX probably has a more skilled, on average, user base > but that's not a reason not to have more complete documentation I would love to see Netmedia move more towards a web-based documentation system with user notes. Dealing with word docs is a real pain, especially when searching for something. Here is an example of one of the best online language references I have seen: http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.fopen.php If you scroll down below the function reference, you will see tons of comments from people about that function. This feedback from users is really helpfull. Just a thought, -Howie BTW, I do quite a bit of freelance web/database work, and could build something like this...hint hint, wink wink, Netmedia ;)

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

From: "John Piccirillo" <> > [...] > I'd like a processor that doesn't constantly fail to > accept a download. This is the single most annoying > feature to my students. [...] Have you tried the beta 4 compiler? We made major changes to the downloader communications protocol. In all the testing I've done so far, I have yet to find a program that requires the downloader rescue option. Let me phrase that as a question -- has anybody using the beta 4 compiler found a program that requires the rescue option? -- Frank Manning -- NetMedia, Inc.

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

Frank, The Beta Version is nice, but I keep getting a complier out of memory error, the download runs fine, but is this causing any other problems. My program only uses 43 bytes ram and 200 or so EEPROM. Any suggestions? ERic ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Manning To: Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:06 AM Subject: Re: [BasicX] RE: BasicX Future ? From: "John Piccirillo" <> > [...] > I'd like a processor that doesn't constantly fail to > accept a download. This is the single most annoying > feature to my students. [...] Have you tried the beta 4 compiler? We made major changes to the downloader communications protocol. In all the testing I've done so far, I have yet to find a program that requires the downloader rescue option. Let me phrase that as a question -- has anybody using the beta 4 compiler found a program that requires the rescue option? -- Frank Manning -- NetMedia, Inc. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT 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 )