As a follow-on to the gentleman who came up with the fix for running
the compiler/IDE under Vista, I would like to suggest a change to the
IDE and rewrite it in Java. While I am not a huge fan of Java, I do
know that if the IDE were rewritten in it, one could run the IDE much
more easily on other platforms.

We are doing our level best to eliminate Windows but two things are
left that require us to run it: the OOPic IDE and the various tools
from Parallax.

Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

--- In o...@yahoogroups.com, Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> As a follow-on to the gentleman who came up with the fix for
running
> the compiler/IDE under Vista, I would like to suggest a change to
the
> IDE and rewrite it in Java. While I am not a huge fan of Java, I
do
> know that if the IDE were rewritten in it, one could run the IDE
much
> more easily on other platforms.
>
> We are doing our level best to eliminate Windows but two things
are
> left that require us to run it: the OOPic IDE and the various
tools
> from Parallax.
>
> Brian Lloyd
> Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
> brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A
1B6C
>

The older V5 IDE source code has been available for years. In fact,
several attempts have been made to port the IDE to Linux. The
problem is, the COMPILER source code hasn't been available. Separate
code, separate issue. Or at least it was...

I would very much NOT like to see the IDE and compiler ported to
Java. I use Linux, I use WinXP but I HATE Java applications with one
possible exception: Eclipse. And even that is optional. It is just
an IDE - compilers and such are outside Eclipse. Java apps are a
nightmare to set up. Most Linux distros don't include Sun Java and
you have to mess with 'alternatives' to set the proper version as the
default. Talk about non-compatible: GNU Java vs Sun Java on the same
machine.

Truth be known, even though I have 3 versions of Linux (Red Hat WS 4,
Ubuntu 7.10 and SUSE 10.3) on 3 different machines, I don't like it.
I USE it every single day but I don't like it. It is NEVER going to
go very far until it gets installable binary drivers and an API for
drivers to target. It is a PITA to run RedHat WS 4 about 40 kernel
upgrades back just because I have to recompile the video driver from
source for every single change. And I have to wait for the
manufacturer to get around to upgrading the driver source to match
the kernel versions.

That certainly isn't the case for WinXP. There is a clean interface
for drivers that doesn't change just because there is a small tweak
to the 'kernel'.

I'm not even going to upgrade to Vista and, when anyone asks, I
suggest they buy their new computers with WinXP and skip the
Vista 'experience'. To put my money where my opinions lie, I just
bought two laptops (Dell Precision M6300) and ordered them both with
WinXP.

Richard



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

> The older V5 IDE source code has been available for years. In fact,
> several attempts have been made to port the IDE to Linux. The
> problem is, the COMPILER source code hasn't been available. Separate
> code, separate issue. Or at least it was...

Savage doesn't own their own compiler? 8-O

> I would very much NOT like to see the IDE and compiler ported to
> Java. I use Linux, I use WinXP but I HATE Java applications with one
> possible exception: Eclipse. And even that is optional. It is just
> an IDE - compilers and such are outside Eclipse. Java apps are a
> nightmare to set up. Most Linux distros don't include Sun Java and
> you have to mess with 'alternatives' to set the proper version as the
> default. Talk about non-compatible: GNU Java vs Sun Java on the same
> machine.

Hmm. I did a very large development about 10 years ago where I had to
have the same code running on something like 12 different platforms
including Windows, Mac, the Linuxae, the BSDs, and Solaris. (It was an
ISP accounting system with RADIUS server talking to an SQL back-end.)
Frankly, Java was the only thing that would work for us and it did.
Even running on MacOS 8 (ugly) and WinNT using MS Access as the
database (even uglier) worked. Of course we were using big Sun/Solaris
iron and Oracle for sites that really had to scale (like AT&T).

So my experience with Java was, quite frankly, very positive.

Gnu has done a version of Java? What were they thinking! We just went
through this with Microsoft and Sun not too long ago.

> Truth be known, even though I have 3 versions of Linux (Red Hat WS 4,
> Ubuntu 7.10 and SUSE 10.3) on 3 different machines, I don't like it.
> I USE it every single day but I don't like it. It is NEVER going to
> go very far until it gets installable binary drivers and an API for
> drivers to target. It is a PITA to run RedHat WS 4 about 40 kernel
> upgrades back just because I have to recompile the video driver from
> source for every single change. And I have to wait for the
> manufacturer to get around to upgrading the driver source to match
> the kernel versions.

That is the point. You have to change whenever you have a new version
of the kernel or OS. That is the beauty of having a consistent and
universal interface.

> That certainly isn't the case for WinXP. There is a clean interface
> for drivers that doesn't change just because there is a small tweak
> to the 'kernel'.
>
> I'm not even going to upgrade to Vista and, when anyone asks, I
> suggest they buy their new computers with WinXP and skip the
> Vista 'experience'. To put my money where my opinions lie, I just
> bought two laptops (Dell Precision M6300) and ordered them both with
> WinXP.

That is all very well and good. OTOH, there are many people who
consider running a Microsoft OS just too high a price to pay. Case in
point, by switching our school from Windows to Macintosh this year the
amount of time I spend on system support has dropped to 20% of what it
was even though I have massively increased the number of services. I
can't afford all the security problems that running Windows entails.
So I need to run something else.

In the mean time, I am forced to run a virtualization package in order
to run Windows on our Macs purely in order to run the OOPic IDE and
the various Parallax IDEs. I was thinking aloud as to how it would be
easier if their IDE could be ported to different platforms. Frankly, I
don't care how it gets done but I bet there are those who would prefer
to run on something other than Windows.
Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

--- In o...@yahoogroups.com, Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> > The older V5 IDE source code has been available for years. In fact,
> > several attempts have been made to port the IDE to Linux. The
> > problem is, the COMPILER source code hasn't been available. Separate
> > code, separate issue. Or at least it was...
>
> Savage doesn't own their own compiler? 8-O

Of course they do. But the IDE code was released into the public
domain (I believe; at least it is available), not the compiler.

There have been several attempts to build a compiler for Linux but
they never get very far.

Richard



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

>> Savage doesn't own their own compiler? 8-O
>
> Of course they do.

Well, that is what I would assume but I guess I misunderstood your=20=20
comment.

> But the IDE code was released into the public
> domain (I believe; at least it is available), not the compiler.

Ah.

> There have been several attempts to build a compiler for Linux but
> they never get very far.

I'd settle for Mac. ;-)

--

Brian Lloyd Granite Bay Montessori
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com 9330 Sierra College Blvd.
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) Roseville, CA 95661, USA
http://www.gbmontessori.com

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
=97 Antoine de Saint-Exup=E9ry

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C

=20

=20


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

I'd sure like to see this - But java doesn't have the GUI support IDE's
that other platforms do, which would make many things (like the
hierarchical breakdowns) possible. I'll certainly suggest it to the
developers however.

DLC

Brian Lloyd wrote:
> As a follow-on to the gentleman who came up with the fix for running
> the compiler/IDE under Vista, I would like to suggest a change to the
> IDE and rewrite it in Java. While I am not a huge fan of Java, I do
> know that if the IDE were rewritten in it, one could run the IDE much
> more easily on other platforms.
>
> We are doing our level best to eliminate Windows but two things are
> left that require us to run it: the OOPic IDE and the various tools
> from Parallax.
>
> Brian Lloyd
> Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
> brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
>
>



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

rtstofer wrote:
> --- In o...@yahoogroups.com, Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
>> As a follow-on to the gentleman who came up with the fix for
>>
> running
>
>> the compiler/IDE under Vista, I would like to suggest a change to
>>
> the
>
>> IDE and rewrite it in Java. While I am not a huge fan of Java, I
>>
> do
>
>> know that if the IDE were rewritten in it, one could run the IDE
>>
> much
>
>> more easily on other platforms.
>>
>> We are doing our level best to eliminate Windows but two things
>>
> are
>
>> left that require us to run it: the OOPic IDE and the various
>>
> tools
>
>> from Parallax.
>>
>> Brian Lloyd
>> Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
>> brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
>> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)
>>
>> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
>> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A
>>
> 1B6C
>
>
> The older V5 IDE source code has been available for years. In fact,
> several attempts have been made to port the IDE to Linux. The
> problem is, the COMPILER source code hasn't been available. Separate
> code, separate issue. Or at least it was...
>
> I would very much NOT like to see the IDE and compiler ported to
> Java. I use Linux, I use WinXP but I HATE Java applications with one
> possible exception: Eclipse. And even that is optional. It is just
> an IDE - compilers and such are outside Eclipse. Java apps are a
> nightmare to set up. Most Linux distros don't include Sun Java and
> you have to mess with 'alternatives' to set the proper version as the
> default. Talk about non-compatible: GNU Java vs Sun Java on the same
> machine.
>
>
My biggest issue with Java is the slow startup. After it is running it
is fine - IF you have the horsepower to run the JVM well. I liked
developing in Java, but the hooks to the GUI were always troublesome.
> Truth be known, even though I have 3 versions of Linux (Red Hat WS 4,
> Ubuntu 7.10 and SUSE 10.3) on 3 different machines, I don't like it.
> I USE it every single day but I don't like it. It is NEVER going to
> go very far until it gets installable binary drivers and an API for
> drivers to target. It is a PITA to run RedHat WS 4 about 40 kernel
> upgrades back just because I have to recompile the video driver from
> source for every single change. And I have to wait for the
> manufacturer to get around to upgrading the driver source to match
> the kernel versions.
>
> That certainly isn't the case for WinXP. There is a clean interface
> for drivers that doesn't change just because there is a small tweak
> to the 'kernel'.
>
> I'm not even going to upgrade to Vista and, when anyone asks, I
> suggest they buy their new computers with WinXP and skip the
> Vista 'experience'. To put my money where my opinions lie, I just
> bought two laptops (Dell Precision M6300) and ordered them both with
> WinXP.
>
>
Ditto. Heck, I've back-rev'd WXP to W2K for quite a while, but many
apps are coming out that are WXP only, so that will be my next step,
after I remove the snoop-and-sneak ware from it. But that is only for a
few things - I'm a Mac fan, now THERE is a UN*X environment done right
(IMO).

DLC
> Richard
>
>



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

I thought the OOPic firmware was the family jewels.

The compiler is just a filter - source code in, .oex code file out;
its not that hard to reverse engineer when one has known inputs and outputs.

At 12:57 AM 3/5/2008, ooPIC Tech Support wrote:
> The compiler source is the family jewels,



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

Brian Lloyd wrote:
>> The older V5 IDE source code has been available for years. In fact,
>> several attempts have been made to port the IDE to Linux. The
>> problem is, the COMPILER source code hasn't been available. Separate
>> code, separate issue. Or at least it was...
>>
>
> Savage doesn't own their own compiler? 8-O
>
>
The compiler source is the family jewels, that will never be open
source. The IDE is just the interface to it, and it has been OS for
quite a while.
>> I would very much NOT like to see the IDE and compiler ported to
>> Java. I use Linux, I use WinXP but I HATE Java applications with one
>> possible exception: Eclipse. And even that is optional. It is just
>> an IDE - compilers and such are outside Eclipse. Java apps are a
>> nightmare to set up. Most Linux distros don't include Sun Java and
>> you have to mess with 'alternatives' to set the proper version as the
>> default. Talk about non-compatible: GNU Java vs Sun Java on the same
>> machine.
>>
>
> Hmm. I did a very large development about 10 years ago where I had to
> have the same code running on something like 12 different platforms
> including Windows, Mac, the Linuxae, the BSDs, and Solaris. (It was an
> ISP accounting system with RADIUS server talking to an SQL back-end.)
> Frankly, Java was the only thing that would work for us and it did.
> Even running on MacOS 8 (ugly) and WinNT using MS Access as the
> database (even uglier) worked. Of course we were using big Sun/Solaris
> iron and Oracle for sites that really had to scale (like AT&T).
>
> So my experience with Java was, quite frankly, very positive.
>
> Gnu has done a version of Java? What were they thinking! We just went
> through this with Microsoft and Sun not too long ago.
>
>
>> Truth be known, even though I have 3 versions of Linux (Red Hat WS 4,
>> Ubuntu 7.10 and SUSE 10.3) on 3 different machines, I don't like it.
>> I USE it every single day but I don't like it. It is NEVER going to
>> go very far until it gets installable binary drivers and an API for
>> drivers to target. It is a PITA to run RedHat WS 4 about 40 kernel
>> upgrades back just because I have to recompile the video driver from
>> source for every single change. And I have to wait for the
>> manufacturer to get around to upgrading the driver source to match
>> the kernel versions.
>>
>
> That is the point. You have to change whenever you have a new version
> of the kernel or OS. That is the beauty of having a consistent and
> universal interface.
>
>
>> That certainly isn't the case for WinXP. There is a clean interface
>> for drivers that doesn't change just because there is a small tweak
>> to the 'kernel'.
>>
>> I'm not even going to upgrade to Vista and, when anyone asks, I
>> suggest they buy their new computers with WinXP and skip the
>> Vista 'experience'. To put my money where my opinions lie, I just
>> bought two laptops (Dell Precision M6300) and ordered them both with
>> WinXP.
>>
>
> That is all very well and good. OTOH, there are many people who
> consider running a Microsoft OS just too high a price to pay. Case in
> point, by switching our school from Windows to Macintosh this year the
> amount of time I spend on system support has dropped to 20% of what it
> was even though I have massively increased the number of services. I
> can't afford all the security problems that running Windows entails.
> So I need to run something else.
>
> In the mean time, I am forced to run a virtualization package in order
> to run Windows on our Macs purely in order to run the OOPic IDE and
> the various Parallax IDEs. I was thinking aloud as to how it would be
> easier if their IDE could be ported to different platforms. Frankly, I
> don't care how it gets done but I bet there are those who would prefer
> to run on something other than Windows.
>
>
Many, but we don't hold our breath. Windows is still the 800 pound
gorilla. When choosing which OS to support, the logical one is
Windows. Today.

DLC
> Brian Lloyd
> Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
> brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
>
>



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

Brian,
Have you looked at the Arduino ? Everything is open source(the
harware design is released under Creative Commons license), and the
IDE(Java)runs on Linux,Mac and Windows. It is based on the Atmega168.
See www.arduino.cc

regards,
Malcolm Turner

--- In o...@yahoogroups.com, Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> As a follow-on to the gentleman who came up with the fix for
running
> the compiler/IDE under Vista, I would like to suggest a change to
the
> IDE and rewrite it in Java. While I am not a huge fan of Java, I
do
> know that if the IDE were rewritten in it, one could run the IDE
much
> more easily on other platforms.
>
> We are doing our level best to eliminate Windows but two things
are
> left that require us to run it: the OOPic IDE and the various
tools
> from Parallax.
>
> Brian Lloyd
> Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
> brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A
1B6C
>



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

On Mar 5, 2008, at 5:35 AM, mgt6910 wrote:

> Brian,
> Have you looked at the Arduino ? Everything is open source(the
> harware design is released under Creative Commons license), and the
> IDE(Java)runs on Linux,Mac and Windows. It is based on the Atmega168.
> See www.arduino.cc

Thank you but no. Right now I am focused on using the BS2, the
Propeller, and the OOPic. *I* might like to try something else but I
have to let my students proceed down one path for awhile. Parallax has
been supremely supportive of our program and I cherish that
relationship. They are only a couple of miles from us and they have
been very kind to allow my students to wander by and pester the
engineers for ideas and suggestions.

But the kids like the OOPic and the object model, especially when
first transitioning from the pictures-based GUI they started with. I
try to introduce the concepts and constructs of procedural programming
before I jump into the forest-obscuring "trees" of the syntax of a
programming language. Remember, I am working with 10-14 year-old kids.
They are doing amazing things when you consider that.

Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

> Ditto. Heck, I've back-rev'd WXP to W2K for quite a while,

Interesting. I have clung to W2K for some time now and my own personal
OOPic development machine is an old laptop running W2K. I too have
finally given up and begun to use XP which, after many years, shows
signs of some stability.

> but many
> apps are coming out that are WXP only, so that will be my next step,
> after I remove the snoop-and-sneak ware from it. But that is only
> for a
> few things - I'm a Mac fan, now THERE is a UN*X environment done right
> (IMO).

I think I agree (for the most part). But never underestimate the power
of glitzy, useless features to drag a perfectly good application or OS
down to the point of poor performance, instability, insecurity, and
unreliability. Apple seems hell-bent on running down the same path as
Microsoft. MacOS is much better now but give Apple time. I am sure
they will be able to screw it up just as badly as Microsoft has with
Windows or as badly as they did with the original MacOS.

As for your comment about "UNIX done right," when I was designing the
Telebit Netblazer (the first commercial remote access server) we opted
to use Mach running on an 80386 as our development platform. (1990) It
was also my first experience with the Mac. (Telebit had standardized
on Mac for desktop applications.) I remember remarking that the
perfect OS would be Mach with the Macintosh GUI overlaid. :-)

Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

>> In the mean time, I am forced to run a virtualization package in
>> order
>> to run Windows on our Macs purely in order to run the OOPic IDE and
>> the various Parallax IDEs. I was thinking aloud as to how it would be
>> easier if their IDE could be ported to different platforms.
>> Frankly, I
>> don't care how it gets done but I bet there are those who would
>> prefer
>> to run on something other than Windows.
> Many, but we don't hold our breath. Windows is still the 800 pound
> gorilla. When choosing which OS to support, the logical one is
> Windows. Today.

Oh, I agree. I wouldn't even think of suggesting abandoning Windows.
OTOH, it would be a one-time effort to support multiple platforms and
then a lot of what you need to do to port to another platform is
already done for you by the Java development team at Sun. It still
lets you provide a product that runs on Windows. (Windows ships with
Java installed as I recall so you dodge that bullet.)

This is not a beauty contest. I think that most experimenters and
engineers want to get the job done. Most have picked the OOPic for its
functionality and the appearance of the IDE is probably not an issue
so long as it gets the job done.

FWIW, one of my 6th-grade students commented that programming the
OOPic seems a lot more like using the GUI programming tool that came
with our Parallax Scribblers than transitioning to BASIC and the Basic
Stamp 2, "just with more words." :-)

Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

On Mar 4, 2008, at 9:49 PM, ooPIC Tech Support wrote:

> I'd sure like to see this - But java doesn't have the GUI support
> IDE's
> that other platforms do, which would make many things (like the
> hierarchical breakdowns) possible. I'll certainly suggest it to the
> developers however.

Well, as with all tools, there are advantages and disadvantages. The
two big advantages are that it will run on multiple platforms and it
will appear and perform the same way on all platforms. The
disadvantages (as I see them) are a GUI that does not completely
conform to the standards for that platform (Windows and Mac being big
on "appearance"), and some reduction in performance. (Oh, and the NRE
of moving to the new platform. That is a total-loss proposition.)

Back when I had to pick a platform to build our app on we did some
testing to see how well the Java JIT JRE performed compared to the
same code written in GCC on both Intel and Sun SPARC. We were quite
surprised to find that Java was, on average, running at about 70% of
the speed of GCC emitting native code for the target platform.

Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

On Mar 5, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Brian Lloyd wrote:

>
> On Mar 5, 2008, at 5:35 AM, mgt6910 wrote:
>
>> Brian,
>> Have you looked at the Arduino ? Everything is open source(the
>> harware design is released under Creative Commons license), and the
>> IDE(Java)runs on Linux,Mac and Windows. It is based on the Atmega168.
>> See www.arduino.cc

Very slick. I might build one for myself to play with just to see how
I like it.

Thank you for the pointer.

Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

--- In o...@yahoogroups.com, Brian Lloyd wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mar 5, 2008, at 5:35 AM, mgt6910 wrote:
> >
> >> Brian,
> >> Have you looked at the Arduino ? Everything is open source(the
> >> harware design is released under Creative Commons license), and
the
> >> IDE(Java)runs on Linux,Mac and Windows. It is based on the
Atmega168.
> >> See www.arduino.cc
>
> Very slick. I might build one for myself to play with just to see
how
> I like it.
>
> Thank you for the pointer.
>
> Brian Lloyd

You can buy them
http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/advanced_search_result.php?
keywords=arduino

Richard



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

On Mar 5, 2008, at 11:23 AM, red71956 wrote:

> You should visit Trossen Robotics (www.trossenrobotics.com) and see
> about entering your class' project in their bi-monthly robotics
> contest. Prizes (apart from the glory) include store credits towards
> many good components. They are NOT limiting entries to bots assembled
> from THEIR parts, any kind of bot is eligible.
> This could help defray the (often considerable) cost of running the
> class, and they are also very helpful with many different areas of
> expertise among the users, from CNC machining to programming to humor.

Interesting. I have robotics this afternoon with my 6th-8th graders. I
will show them this and see if they want to enter any of their
projects. What they have done is not in the same category as the
winners but then, I bet the winners aren't in 6th grade either. ;-)
Brian Lloyd
Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)

PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C



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

Mostly. Check out Jugatus on the www.savageinnovations.com site.

DLC

Andrew Porrett wrote:
> I thought the OOPic firmware was the family jewels.
>
> The compiler is just a filter - source code in, .oex code file out;
> its not that hard to reverse engineer when one has known inputs and outputs.
>
> At 12:57 AM 3/5/2008, ooPIC Tech Support wrote:
>
>> The compiler source is the family jewels,
>>
>
>



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

No offense, but I just see vapourware at this point. Instead of
working on this Jugatus thingie, Scott should take an hour or three
to fix what looks to me to be a simple bug (that object bug) in the
V6 compiler. When an update that should've taken a day to appear
doesn't show up for weeks, how can one have much confidence in the
claimed Summer 2008 release date?

At 07:06 PM 3/5/2008, ooPIC Tech Support wrote:
>Mostly. Check out Jugatus on the www.savageinnovations.com site.
>
>DLC
>
>Andrew Porrett wrote:
> > I thought the OOPic firmware was the family jewels.



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

You should visit Trossen Robotics (www.trossenrobotics.com) and see
about entering your class' project in their bi-monthly robotics
contest. Prizes (apart from the glory) include store credits towards
many good components. They are NOT limiting entries to bots assembled
from THEIR parts, any kind of bot is eligible.
This could help defray the (often considerable) cost of running the
class, and they are also very helpful with many different areas of
expertise among the users, from CNC machining to programming to humor.

--- In o...@yahoogroups.com, Brian Lloyd wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2008, at 5:35 AM, mgt6910 wrote:
>
> > Brian,
> > Have you looked at the Arduino ? Everything is open source(the
> > harware design is released under Creative Commons license), and
the
> > IDE(Java)runs on Linux,Mac and Windows. It is based on the
Atmega168.
> > See www.arduino.cc
>
> Thank you but no. Right now I am focused on using the BS2, the
> Propeller, and the OOPic. *I* might like to try something else but
I
> have to let my students proceed down one path for awhile. Parallax
has
> been supremely supportive of our program and I cherish that
> relationship. They are only a couple of miles from us and they
have
> been very kind to allow my students to wander by and pester the
> engineers for ideas and suggestions.
>
> But the kids like the OOPic and the object model, especially when
> first transitioning from the pictures-based GUI they started with.
I
> try to introduce the concepts and constructs of procedural
programming
> before I jump into the forest-obscuring "trees" of the syntax of a
> programming language. Remember, I am working with 10-14 year-old
kids.
> They are doing amazing things when you consider that.
>
> Brian Lloyd
> Granite Bay Montessori School 9330 Sierra College Bl
> brian AT gbmontessori DOT com Roseville, CA 95661
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.791.912.8170 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A
1B6C
>



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