Nick,
You may want to try some of the low-cost ARM based eval boards from
LogicPD or Revely. They are based on Sharp MCU's and come with free
GCC tools with plenty of RTOS ports available for them.
learn more here:
http://www.logicpd.com/eps/devkits/sharp/sdk/sharp_sdk/http://www.revely.com
I hope this helps!
-Z
Reply by An Schwob in USA●February 7, 20052005-02-07
Hi,
I can assure you they do like it a lot! ARM related companies offer
many devices for different target markets and yet, there are still
SOOOO many more 51-designs which ARM would love to get hold of, once
all these designs migrate.
An Schwob
CBarn24050 wrote:
> >Subject: Re: Developmet kit for embedded education
> >From: larwe@larwe.com
>
> >>or of course the "32 bit 8051" or ARM7
>
> > The arm has nothing in common with the 8051.
> >
>
> >Since I'm one of the authors who has published this comment, I feel
the
> >need to defend it: The ARM7 core and the 8051 core have this in
common:
> >ubiquity. The thrust of the "ARM7 is the 32-bit 8051" statement is
that
> >ARM7 fills the same niche in the 32-bit space that 8051 fills in the
> >8-bit space.
>
> How so? What niche do you think the 8051 fills? I doubt if the good
folks at
> Arm would like your comparison. Is the Arm as a standalone processor
going to
> be made by everyone and his brother like the 8051? Are Arm tools
going to be
> freely available all over the net? If so then your statement might
have some
> merit.
Reply by Buddy Smith●February 7, 20052005-02-07
nick13 <manoes1@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What develoment kits would you would consider for senior undergrad and
> graduate level embedded systems course?
> It needs to be versatile and support several peripherals at reasonable
> cost. It will also be used in senior projects and MS projects.
> What C compiler you would recommend?
> What RTOS ports exist for this platform?
> How popular is this system? Any links?
I would recommend that you check out www.picbook.com
I happen to have taken a class by the author of the book, and it was quite
excellent. The book even includes sample lab assignments.
ttyl,
--buddy
Reply by Chris Hills●February 7, 20052005-02-07
In article <k3XLOjCY3iBCFANj@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>, Chris Hills
<chris@phaedsys.org> writes
>In article <2cpNd.3223$wK.2376@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>, Ed
>Beroset <beroset@mindspring.com> writes
>>Chris Hills wrote:
>>> In article <3IydnX_7kJwOx5nfRVn-3A@rogers.com>, R Adsett <radsett@junk.a
>>> eolusdevelopment.cm> writes
>>>
>>>>In article <mUz7GCBINBBCFA+k@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>, chris@phaedsys.org
>>>>says...
>>>>
>>>>>8051 (any one of the 600+ varients from 30+ silicon vendors) There is no
>>>>>peripheral that the 8051 family does not have.
>>>>
>>>>None? That's quite an assertion to leave out there naked Chris. :) I
>>>>suspect there might be one or two not available on an 8051.
>>>>
>>>>Robert
>>>
>>> Yes... probably a risky statement. However, having set myself up:
>>> Are there any peripherals the 8051 family does not have?
>>
>>IEEE-488 bus? (Yes, I'm being silly.)
>
>Silly maybe but a valid point for the fall I set my self up for :-)
Google <IEEE 488 8051> tells a different story
Chris Hills wrote:
>
> >
> >IEEE-488 bus? (Yes, I'm being silly.)
>
> Silly maybe but a valid point for the fall I set my self up for :-)
Reply by Al Borowski●February 7, 20052005-02-07
> How so? What niche do you think the 8051 fills? I doubt if the good folks at
> Arm would like your comparison. Is the Arm as a standalone processor going to
> be made by everyone and his brother like the 8051?
ARM don't make processors, just just design the cores. Tons of compaines
make CPUs based on the ARM code.
> Are Arm tools going to be
> freely available all over the net? If so then your statement might have some
> merit.
They already are. The GNU tools are fairly decent.
Al
Reply by Chris Hills●February 6, 20052005-02-06
In article <20050206152352.17709.00000445@mb-m07.aol.com>, CBarn24050
<cbarn24050@aol.com> writes
>
>>Subject: Re: Developmet kit for embedded education
>>From: larwe@larwe.com
>
>>>or of course the "32 bit 8051" or ARM7
>
>> The arm has nothing in common with the 8051.
>>
>
>>Since I'm one of the authors who has published this comment, I feel the
>>need to defend it: The ARM7 core and the 8051 core have this in common:
>>ubiquity. The thrust of the "ARM7 is the 32-bit 8051" statement is that
>>ARM7 fills the same niche in the 32-bit space that 8051 fills in the
>>8-bit space.
>
>How so? What niche do you think the 8051 fills?
The 51 is not a niche. It is broad market. AVR, XA, Rabbit etc are
Niche.
> I doubt if the good folks at
>Arm would like your comparison.
They actively promote it. The 51 is like the Jeep. Old, has it's faults
but is everywhere. "Everyone" has used one. "Everyone" knows it.
They want ARM to be seen as the generic processor you go to when the 51
is not powerful enough for your project. Default choice 51 or ARM
(unless you need something special)
>Is the Arm as a standalone processor going to
>be made by everyone and his brother like the 8051?
No. I doubt ARM core will ever be availible like the 8031/2 8051/2 was.
ARM do IP cores. Everyone else will use the core to produce stand alone
part with ARM core and peripherals.
> Are Arm tools going to be
>freely available all over the net? If so then your statement might have some
>merit.
Why free? That is largely irrelevant for professional development.
Though Lewin and I disagree fundamentally on this point :-)
However the answer is yes. Lewin's book is about GNU & Linux for ARM
(Atmel ARM7 parts). Most commercial ARM debuggers come with a free GNU
ARM compiler.
Though for the professionals :-) there is a very wide choice of
commercial compilers and tools.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Reply by Chris Hills●February 6, 20052005-02-06
In article <1107714528.727096.200390@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
larwe@larwe.com writes
>
>CBarn24050 wrote:
>
>> >or of course the "32 bit 8051" or ARM7 again lots of varients from
>lots
>> >of vendors but this is a little more expensive.
>>
>> The arm has nothing in common with the 8051.
>
>Since I'm one of the authors who has published this comment, I feel the
>need to defend it: The ARM7 core and the 8051 core have this in common:
>ubiquity. The thrust of the "ARM7 is the 32-bit 8051" statement is that
>ARM7 fills the same niche in the 32-bit space that 8051 fills in the
>8-bit space. Furthermore, due to its tiny die space, ARM7 is beginning
>to eat 8-bit designs also.
>
I should cite the reference It is from
"Embedded System Design on a Shoestring: Achieving High performance with
a Limited Budget"
Published 2003 by Newnes / Elsevier ISNB 0-7506-7604-4
Author LEwin A. R. W. Edwards
It is how to use Linux on a small Atmel Arm board.
see www.larwe.com
As Lewin says ARM is holding the same space in the 32 bit market that
the 51 has in the 8 bit market.
"everyone" produces 51 and ARM parts (even Atmel who do the AVR)
"Everyone" produces 51 and ARM tools (from FREE to very expensive)
"everyone" produces 51 and ARM example code
The 51 performance and peripherals are taking it into to the low end 16
bit area.
The ARM cost model is taking it down to the 16 bit market.
5 years ago the head of Micros for Philips said he could foresee "in 5
years" that the 8 bit and 32 bit markets would meet on
price/performance and the 16 bit market would disappear.
There will of course always be exceptions.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Reply by ●February 6, 20052005-02-06
>>ubiquity. The thrust of the "ARM7 is the 32-bit 8051" statement is
that
>>ARM7 fills the same niche in the 32-bit space that 8051 fills in the
>>8-bit space.
>From your response I'm getting the impression you either haven't
thought about this topic or don't adequately understand it, but I'll
reply nevertheless.
>How so? What niche do you think the 8051 fills?
>I doubt if the good folks at Arm would like your comparison.
They actively foster the comparison.
>Is the Arm as a standalone processor going to be made by
>everyone and his brother like the 8051?
It depends what you're asking. ARM makes nothing tangible, in case you
didn't know this. They are an IP company. So the answer to the question
"are ARM cores going to be fabbed by everyone and his brother like the
8051?" is "they already are". And ARM likes this just fine, since they
get a bite of every single one. That's their business model.
>Are Arm tools going to be freely available all over the net?
They already are.
Reply by CBarn24050●February 6, 20052005-02-06
>Subject: Re: Developmet kit for embedded education
>From: larwe@larwe.com
>>or of course the "32 bit 8051" or ARM7
> The arm has nothing in common with the 8051.
>
>Since I'm one of the authors who has published this comment, I feel the
>need to defend it: The ARM7 core and the 8051 core have this in common:
>ubiquity. The thrust of the "ARM7 is the 32-bit 8051" statement is that
>ARM7 fills the same niche in the 32-bit space that 8051 fills in the
>8-bit space.
How so? What niche do you think the 8051 fills? I doubt if the good folks at
Arm would like your comparison. Is the Arm as a standalone processor going to
be made by everyone and his brother like the 8051? Are Arm tools going to be
freely available all over the net? If so then your statement might have some
merit.