--- In l..., Mike Harrison wrote:
> >Even so, there are plenty of free tools but you might have to buy the JTAG dongle. But, why do you insist on JTAG? Sure, it's nice but it isn't necessary. You can do all your development using ISP and a serial console. Remember, if you don't put bugs in your software, you won't need JTAG to root them out.
> > Not using JTAG is downright dumb unless you put no value to your time. The chip has a free onboard
> debugger, so not using it to save a few $ on hardware to talk to it is completely false economy.
> You'd cover the cost of the JTAG hardware in the time saved tracking down a couple of bugs.
>

Exactly my point! If you value your time (in $) then it is reasonable to value someone else's.

As to chip manufacturers providing free tools, most do. Microchip gives away MPLAB and several compilers. However, if you want the best code generation, you have to pay for the commercial version.

Xilinx gives away WebPack ISE for FPGA development. It is not the best toolchain to use; if you want that, you have to pay a LOT of money. Nevertheless, WebPack ISE will get the job done.

UDK gives away the UDK Development Kit for game development. However, they don't give away all the static meshes or animations that they use in their commercial games (Unreal Tournament among others). You can develop all the games you want. But, if you want to sell them, UDK expects a royalty of about 25% of profit.

I have always thought that manufacturerss are in the business of selling chips and that they should give away the development tools. To some extent, that's the way it works. But the BEST tools are not free, just something that will work well enough to do proof of concept.

Richard

An Engineer's Guide to the LPC2100 Series

*Great recomendation Murlay.
*
2011/1/30 G

> Hi,
>
> I am Muraly, Managing Director from SOFTLAND INDIA LIMITED, TRIVANDRUM,
> kERALA, iNDIA
>
> We are using NXP's LPC1768 for our Handhled computers.
>
> I feel COOCOX IDE is the answer for the free IDE
>
> We have developed an SDK based on CooCox IDE for our PALMTEC Amphibia,
> Handhled computer with
> inbuilt 128X64 Graphic monochrom STN LCD, 2000mAh Li-Ion Rechargeable
> Battery, 30Key Alphanumeric Keypad
> and 2inch Fast thermal Printer.
>
> We feel that with out any new PCB fabrication, engineers can use this as
> such.
>
> I feel NXP has done a very good job by bringing CooCox IDE based on GNU
> Compiler.
>
> Hats off to NXP!!!!!!
>
> G.Muraly
> 0091 9387470944
> g...@palmtec.co.in
> --- In l... , "Felipe de
> Andrade Neves L." wrote:
> >
> > *This is a nice discution. Thanks Richard.*
>
> > *
> > *
> > *I think I have not been clear. *
> > *
> > *
> > *I didn't want to give the impression that somehow anyone strategy is
> > inhibiting the world's growth in my opinion. Companies has to make
> profit, I
> > have too.*
> > *
> > *
> > *I've brought an idealistic point of view, did intend to bring it to
> > discussion, to see what are ppl thinking about the subject. I fully agree
> > that this is idealistic because it is not applicable at todays world,
> maybe
> > in future? Or maybe the markets strategies will never be as I mentioned.
> > This is the point of the discussion. Using the NXP's case as an example,
> **in
> > the exposed idealistic angle, **they should have paid themselves for the
> > software and released it limitation-less along with theirs products. I
> can
> > say that idealistic, not realistic of course. I can see that they are
> > struggling to lower the costs of technology migration, still, it is not
> the
> > point of the topic to criticize or to complain. Just discuss. *
> > *
> > *
> > *Since you mentioned, I agree linux distribution model doesn't buy
> > groceries, if linux distribution model is really good to world's growth,
> > then the next challenge is to make it profitable.*
> > *This seems to be an interesting question, is linux distribution model
> good
> > for economies? *
> > *
> > *
> > *I always like to look at the internet markets, it has absolutely no
> market
> > barrier, anyone can open an internet business with a very short budget.
> And
> > yet, they can make profit of a billion providing free services. It is all
> > possible due to the mass use of the service.*
> > * *
> > *So, the example I think we engineers should get from the internet
> business
> > model is: Target the masses and make it free for the user. This is a
> > challenge, internet has no production costs.*
> > *
> > *
> > *Years ago, we had to pay for our cable TV decoders, today we don't. It
> is
> > an example of subsidization and profit source relocation. I look forward
> for
> > the day we don't have to pay for the "device" that will allow us to use a
> > product or service. The IDE is this device. I am quite sure the market is
> > walking toward this point. NXP is probably going to make it happen.*
> > *
> > *
> > *Felipe.*
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> >
> > 2011/1/29 rtstofer
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In l... > 40yahoogroups.com>, "Felipe de
>
> > > Andrade Neves L." wrote:
> > > >
> > > > *Thanks folks for the quick answers. I've got no doubts now.*
> > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > > *I agree there's nothing wrong about selling software. *
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > > *I have a little idealist and particular point of view about the
> today's
> > > > and tomorrow's engineering market.*
> > > > *It is my opinion that to a 32bits uC company really get access to
> the
> > > > growing markets, such as the Brazilian one for example, where ppl
> really
> > > are
> > > > attached to the 8bits, the 32bits uC manufactures must completely
> > > > destroy technology
> > > > migration barriers. Like, lowering costs of the development boards,
> > > > providing good free and unlimited IDE for their chips and providing
> ready
> > > > for use firmware libraries.*
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > > *The world is experiencing a strong transition from the non
> > > micro-controlled
> > > > electronics to the embedded systems, the uC company that will take
> the
> > > > bigger slice of this growing market is the one that will
> > > > offer lowest technology migration overhead/barrier, provided that
> they
> > > > follow uC chip lowest prices too. LPCXpresso will put NXP's ahead.*
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > > *Also, by intensely lowering the technology migration costs the
> > > electronics
> > > > market entrance barriers would be brought down as well, so more and
> more
> > > > small companies would be able to sell electronic devices, witch would
> be
> > > a
> > > > gift to the world's economy growth.*
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > > *I hoped NXP's cortex m0 strategy would go deeper in this line of
> > > though.*
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > >
> > > But LPCXpresso is only one implementation of one small portion of NXP's
> > > portfolio. And, really, it isn't NXP's! They just peddle it as an
> > > introduction to one device family. The LPCLink portion (which is really
> what
> > > you are after) belongs to Code Red and those folks probably want to put
> food
> > > on their table. They don't make a dime on chip sales.
> > >
> > > If a $1000 software cost will prevent a business from forming, it isn't
> > > likely to survive anyway. Besides, a lot of development can be done
> with the
> > > free version.
> > >
> > > Even so, there are plenty of free tools but you might have to buy the
> JTAG
> > > dongle. But, why do you insist on JTAG? Sure, it's nice but it isn't
> > > necessary. You can do all your development using ISP and a serial
> console.
> > > Remember, if you don't put bugs in your software, you won't need JTAG
> to
> > > root them out.
> > >
> > > You have picked one device, LPCXpresso, to determine that somehow Code
> > > Red's (and by association, NXP's) business model inhibits world growth.
> > > There are dozens of similar but unemcumbered boards around and these
> boards
> > > would be used for initial development only. In the end, a commercial
> product
> > > would be built on a custom PCB.
> > >
> > > You were planning to charge for your intellectual content, weren't you?
> Why
> > > deny Code Red the same opportunity?
> > >
> > > The Linux business model won't buy groceries.
> > >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Hi,

I am Muraly, Managing Director from SOFTLAND INDIA LIMITED, TRIVANDRUM, kERALA, iNDIA

We are using NXP's LPC1768 for our Handhled computers.

I feel COOCOX IDE is the answer for the free IDE

We have developed an SDK based on CooCox IDE for our PALMTEC Amphibia, Handhled computer with
inbuilt 128X64 Graphic monochrom STN LCD, 2000mAh Li-Ion Rechargeable Battery, 30Key Alphanumeric Keypad
and 2inch Fast thermal Printer.

We feel that with out any new PCB fabrication, engineers can use this as such.

I feel NXP has done a very good job by bringing CooCox IDE based on GNU Compiler.

Hats off to NXP!!!!!!

G.Muraly
0091 9387470944
g...@palmtec.co.in

--- In l..., "Felipe de Andrade Neves L." wrote:
>
> *This is a nice discution. Thanks Richard.*
> *
> *
> *I think I have not been clear. *
> *
> *
> *I didn't want to give the impression that somehow anyone strategy is
> inhibiting the world's growth in my opinion. Companies has to make profit, I
> have too.*
> *
> *
> *I've brought an idealistic point of view, did intend to bring it to
> discussion, to see what are ppl thinking about the subject. I fully agree
> that this is idealistic because it is not applicable at todays world, maybe
> in future? Or maybe the markets strategies will never be as I mentioned.
> This is the point of the discussion. Using the NXP's case as an example, **in
> the exposed idealistic angle, **they should have paid themselves for the
> software and released it limitation-less along with theirs products. I can
> say that idealistic, not realistic of course. I can see that they are
> struggling to lower the costs of technology migration, still, it is not the
> point of the topic to criticize or to complain. Just discuss. *
> *
> *
> *Since you mentioned, I agree linux distribution model doesn't buy
> groceries, if linux distribution model is really good to world's growth,
> then the next challenge is to make it profitable.*
> *This seems to be an interesting question, is linux distribution model good
> for economies? *
> *
> *
> *I always like to look at the internet markets, it has absolutely no market
> barrier, anyone can open an internet business with a very short budget. And
> yet, they can make profit of a billion providing free services. It is all
> possible due to the mass use of the service.*
> * *
> *So, the example I think we engineers should get from the internet business
> model is: Target the masses and make it free for the user. This is a
> challenge, internet has no production costs.*
> *
> *
> *Years ago, we had to pay for our cable TV decoders, today we don't. It is
> an example of subsidization and profit source relocation. I look forward for
> the day we don't have to pay for the "device" that will allow us to use a
> product or service. The IDE is this device. I am quite sure the market is
> walking toward this point. NXP is probably going to make it happen.*
> *
> *
> *Felipe.*
> *
> *
> *
> *
>
> 2011/1/29 rtstofer >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In l... , "Felipe de
> > Andrade Neves L." wrote:
> > >
> > > *Thanks folks for the quick answers. I've got no doubts now.*
> >
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *I agree there's nothing wrong about selling software. *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *I have a little idealist and particular point of view about the today's
> > > and tomorrow's engineering market.*
> > > *It is my opinion that to a 32bits uC company really get access to the
> > > growing markets, such as the Brazilian one for example, where ppl really
> > are
> > > attached to the 8bits, the 32bits uC manufactures must completely
> > > destroy technology
> > > migration barriers. Like, lowering costs of the development boards,
> > > providing good free and unlimited IDE for their chips and providing ready
> > > for use firmware libraries.*
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *The world is experiencing a strong transition from the non
> > micro-controlled
> > > electronics to the embedded systems, the uC company that will take the
> > > bigger slice of this growing market is the one that will
> > > offer lowest technology migration overhead/barrier, provided that they
> > > follow uC chip lowest prices too. LPCXpresso will put NXP's ahead.*
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *Also, by intensely lowering the technology migration costs the
> > electronics
> > > market entrance barriers would be brought down as well, so more and more
> > > small companies would be able to sell electronic devices, witch would be
> > a
> > > gift to the world's economy growth.*
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *I hoped NXP's cortex m0 strategy would go deeper in this line of
> > though.*
> > > *
> > > *
> >
> > But LPCXpresso is only one implementation of one small portion of NXP's
> > portfolio. And, really, it isn't NXP's! They just peddle it as an
> > introduction to one device family. The LPCLink portion (which is really what
> > you are after) belongs to Code Red and those folks probably want to put food
> > on their table. They don't make a dime on chip sales.
> >
> > If a $1000 software cost will prevent a business from forming, it isn't
> > likely to survive anyway. Besides, a lot of development can be done with the
> > free version.
> >
> > Even so, there are plenty of free tools but you might have to buy the JTAG
> > dongle. But, why do you insist on JTAG? Sure, it's nice but it isn't
> > necessary. You can do all your development using ISP and a serial console.
> > Remember, if you don't put bugs in your software, you won't need JTAG to
> > root them out.
> >
> > You have picked one device, LPCXpresso, to determine that somehow Code
> > Red's (and by association, NXP's) business model inhibits world growth.
> > There are dozens of similar but unemcumbered boards around and these boards
> > would be used for initial development only. In the end, a commercial product
> > would be built on a custom PCB.
> >
> > You were planning to charge for your intellectual content, weren't you? Why
> > deny Code Red the same opportunity?
> >
> > The Linux business model won't buy groceries.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
>

Has anyone tried using the LPCXpresso with openocd or linux?

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Mike Harrison wrote:

>
> >Even so, there are plenty of free tools but you might have to buy the JTAG
> dongle. But, why do you insist on JTAG? Sure, it's nice but it isn't
> necessary. You can do all your development using ISP and a serial console.
> Remember, if you don't put bugs in your software, you won't need JTAG to
> root them out.
> > Not using JTAG is downright dumb unless you put no value to your time. The
> chip has a free onboard
> debugger, so not using it to save a few $ on hardware to talk to it is
> completely false economy.
> You'd cover the cost of the JTAG hardware in the time saved tracking down a
> couple of bugs.
>
>
>

>Even so, there are plenty of free tools but you might have to buy the JTAG dongle. But, why do you insist on JTAG? Sure, it's nice but it isn't necessary. You can do all your development using ISP and a serial console. Remember, if you don't put bugs in your software, you won't need JTAG to root them out.
>

Not using JTAG is downright dumb unless you put no value to your time. The chip has a free onboard
debugger, so not using it to save a few $ on hardware to talk to it is completely false economy.
You'd cover the cost of the JTAG hardware in the time saved tracking down a couple of bugs.

The free LPCXpresso IDE is limited to 128k. However, The LPC11 and LPC13 parts and half of the LPC17 family has less than 128k of Flash on chip, in which case this is not a limitation. i.e. for those parts, it is a completely free toolkit.

My guess is that most people who are migrating from 8/16 bit parts are going to be using the 'smaller' LPC parts anyway (=<128k), so for those guys LPCXPresso seems like a pretty good option.

--- In l..., "Felipe de Andrade Neves L." wrote:
>
> *Thanks folks for the quick answers. I've got no doubts now.*
> *
> *
> *I agree there's nothing wrong about selling software. *
> *
> *
> *I have a little idealist and particular point of view about the today's
> and tomorrow's engineering market.*
> *It is my opinion that to a 32bits uC company really get access to the
> growing markets, such as the Brazilian one for example, where ppl really are
> attached to the 8bits, the 32bits uC manufactures must completely
> destroy technology
> migration barriers. Like, lowering costs of the development boards,
> providing good free and unlimited IDE for their chips and providing ready
> for use firmware libraries.*
> *
> *
> *The world is experiencing a strong transition from the non micro-controlled
> electronics to the embedded systems, the uC company that will take the
> bigger slice of this growing market is the one that will
> offer lowest technology migration overhead/barrier, provided that they
> follow uC chip lowest prices too. LPCXpresso will put NXP's ahead.*
> *
> *
> *Also, by intensely lowering the technology migration costs the electronics
> market entrance barriers would be brought down as well, so more and more
> small companies would be able to sell electronic devices, witch would be a
> gift to the world's economy growth.*
> *
> *
> *I hoped NXP's cortex m0 strategy would go deeper in this line of though.*
> *
> *
> *att.*
> *
> *
> *2011/1/29 rtstofer
> *
> >
> > * *
> >
> > *
> >
> > --- In l... , "Felipe de
> > Andrade Neves L." wrote:
> > >
> > > *Hello,**
> > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *I've been reading some documentation about the LPCXpresso, I found this
> > > board is really smart due to the junction of jtag and target at the same
> > > board.*
> > > *
> > > *
> > *
> > * > *But I have a question, s**eems that the modifications made at the
> > eclipse*
> > *
> > > IDE isn't free, and has firmware limitations, what whould be the
> > > limitations? *
> > > *(bad nxp move here, the cheaper the better, free, even better for
> > > massifying lpc chips)*
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *And, I am very into linux and free softaware, is it possible to use the
> > > jtag using a free enviroment running on linux? I run a blog in portuguese
> > > (BR) language about free embedded system - selivre.wordpress.com, I am
> > > looking foward to use free enviroment with the LPCXpresso board. *
> > > *
> > > *
> > *
> > * > *Att.*
> > >
> >
> > Code Red is in the BUSINESS of selling software, Embedded Artists makes
> > money building the boards and NXP sells chips. Everybody is in the game for
> > money. Nothing wrong with that!
> >
> > If you want to use the LPC-Link gadget, you probably have to play by Code
> > Red's rules. The limitation is clearly specified: the FREE version of the
> > IDE can only download 128 KB while the unlimited version ($1000) can
> > download 512 KB.
> >
> > Maybe someone will eventually get the LPC-Link device to work with OpenOCD
> > but it'll probably be a while.
> >
> > Why get hung up on a vendor specific JTAG approach when OpenOCD will work
> > with a lot of dongles? There are a lot of LPC1xxx boards although the
> > LPCXpresso price is compelling ($30).
> >
> > Alas, the pricing just isn't compelling enough to want to install yet
> > another IDE/toolchain with limited download capabilities.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > *
> >
> > **
>

*This is a nice discution. Thanks Richard.*
*
*
*I think I have not been clear. *
*
*
*I didn't want to give the impression that somehow anyone strategy is
inhibiting the world's growth in my opinion. Companies has to make profit, I
have too.*
*
*
*I've brought an idealistic point of view, did intend to bring it to
discussion, to see what are ppl thinking about the subject. I fully agree
that this is idealistic because it is not applicable at todays world, maybe
in future? Or maybe the markets strategies will never be as I mentioned.
This is the point of the discussion. Using the NXP's case as an example, **in
the exposed idealistic angle, **they should have paid themselves for the
software and released it limitation-less along with theirs products. I can
say that idealistic, not realistic of course. I can see that they are
struggling to lower the costs of technology migration, still, it is not the
point of the topic to criticize or to complain. Just discuss. *
*
*
*Since you mentioned, I agree linux distribution model doesn't buy
groceries, if linux distribution model is really good to world's growth,
then the next challenge is to make it profitable.*
*This seems to be an interesting question, is linux distribution model good
for economies? *
*
*
*I always like to look at the internet markets, it has absolutely no market
barrier, anyone can open an internet business with a very short budget. And
yet, they can make profit of a billion providing free services. It is all
possible due to the mass use of the service.*
* *
*So, the example I think we engineers should get from the internet business
model is: Target the masses and make it free for the user. This is a
challenge, internet has no production costs.*
*
*
*Years ago, we had to pay for our cable TV decoders, today we don't. It is
an example of subsidization and profit source relocation. I look forward for
the day we don't have to pay for the "device" that will allow us to use a
product or service. The IDE is this device. I am quite sure the market is
walking toward this point. NXP is probably going to make it happen.*
*
*
*Felipe.*
*
*
*
*

2011/1/29 rtstofer

> --- In l... , "Felipe de
> Andrade Neves L." wrote:
> >
> > *Thanks folks for the quick answers. I've got no doubts now.*
>
> > *
> > *
> > *I agree there's nothing wrong about selling software. *
> > *
> > *
> > *I have a little idealist and particular point of view about the today's
> > and tomorrow's engineering market.*
> > *It is my opinion that to a 32bits uC company really get access to the
> > growing markets, such as the Brazilian one for example, where ppl really
> are
> > attached to the 8bits, the 32bits uC manufactures must completely
> > destroy technology
> > migration barriers. Like, lowering costs of the development boards,
> > providing good free and unlimited IDE for their chips and providing ready
> > for use firmware libraries.*
> > *
> > *
> > *The world is experiencing a strong transition from the non
> micro-controlled
> > electronics to the embedded systems, the uC company that will take the
> > bigger slice of this growing market is the one that will
> > offer lowest technology migration overhead/barrier, provided that they
> > follow uC chip lowest prices too. LPCXpresso will put NXP's ahead.*
> > *
> > *
> > *Also, by intensely lowering the technology migration costs the
> electronics
> > market entrance barriers would be brought down as well, so more and more
> > small companies would be able to sell electronic devices, witch would be
> a
> > gift to the world's economy growth.*
> > *
> > *
> > *I hoped NXP's cortex m0 strategy would go deeper in this line of
> though.*
> > *
> > *
>
> But LPCXpresso is only one implementation of one small portion of NXP's
> portfolio. And, really, it isn't NXP's! They just peddle it as an
> introduction to one device family. The LPCLink portion (which is really what
> you are after) belongs to Code Red and those folks probably want to put food
> on their table. They don't make a dime on chip sales.
>
> If a $1000 software cost will prevent a business from forming, it isn't
> likely to survive anyway. Besides, a lot of development can be done with the
> free version.
>
> Even so, there are plenty of free tools but you might have to buy the JTAG
> dongle. But, why do you insist on JTAG? Sure, it's nice but it isn't
> necessary. You can do all your development using ISP and a serial console.
> Remember, if you don't put bugs in your software, you won't need JTAG to
> root them out.
>
> You have picked one device, LPCXpresso, to determine that somehow Code
> Red's (and by association, NXP's) business model inhibits world growth.
> There are dozens of similar but unemcumbered boards around and these boards
> would be used for initial development only. In the end, a commercial product
> would be built on a custom PCB.
>
> You were planning to charge for your intellectual content, weren't you? Why
> deny Code Red the same opportunity?
>
> The Linux business model won't buy groceries.
>
> Richard
>
>
>

--- In l..., "Felipe de Andrade Neves L." wrote:
>
> *Thanks folks for the quick answers. I've got no doubts now.*
> *
> *
> *I agree there's nothing wrong about selling software. *
> *
> *
> *I have a little idealist and particular point of view about the today's
> and tomorrow's engineering market.*
> *It is my opinion that to a 32bits uC company really get access to the
> growing markets, such as the Brazilian one for example, where ppl really are
> attached to the 8bits, the 32bits uC manufactures must completely
> destroy technology
> migration barriers. Like, lowering costs of the development boards,
> providing good free and unlimited IDE for their chips and providing ready
> for use firmware libraries.*
> *
> *
> *The world is experiencing a strong transition from the non micro-controlled
> electronics to the embedded systems, the uC company that will take the
> bigger slice of this growing market is the one that will
> offer lowest technology migration overhead/barrier, provided that they
> follow uC chip lowest prices too. LPCXpresso will put NXP's ahead.*
> *
> *
> *Also, by intensely lowering the technology migration costs the electronics
> market entrance barriers would be brought down as well, so more and more
> small companies would be able to sell electronic devices, witch would be a
> gift to the world's economy growth.*
> *
> *
> *I hoped NXP's cortex m0 strategy would go deeper in this line of though.*
> *
> *

But LPCXpresso is only one implementation of one small portion of NXP's portfolio. And, really, it isn't NXP's! They just peddle it as an introduction to one device family. The LPCLink portion (which is really what you are after) belongs to Code Red and those folks probably want to put food on their table. They don't make a dime on chip sales.

If a $1000 software cost will prevent a business from forming, it isn't likely to survive anyway. Besides, a lot of development can be done with the free version.

Even so, there are plenty of free tools but you might have to buy the JTAG dongle. But, why do you insist on JTAG? Sure, it's nice but it isn't necessary. You can do all your development using ISP and a serial console. Remember, if you don't put bugs in your software, you won't need JTAG to root them out.

You have picked one device, LPCXpresso, to determine that somehow Code Red's (and by association, NXP's) business model inhibits world growth. There are dozens of similar but unemcumbered boards around and these boards would be used for initial development only. In the end, a commercial product would be built on a custom PCB.

You were planning to charge for your intellectual content, weren't you? Why deny Code Red the same opportunity?

The Linux business model won't buy groceries.

Richard

*Thanks folks for the quick answers. I've got no doubts now.*
*
*
*I agree there's nothing wrong about selling software. *
*
*
*I have a little idealist and particular point of view about the today's
and tomorrow's engineering market.*
*It is my opinion that to a 32bits uC company really get access to the
growing markets, such as the Brazilian one for example, where ppl really are
attached to the 8bits, the 32bits uC manufactures must completely
destroy technology
migration barriers. Like, lowering costs of the development boards,
providing good free and unlimited IDE for their chips and providing ready
for use firmware libraries.*
*
*
*The world is experiencing a strong transition from the non micro-controlled
electronics to the embedded systems, the uC company that will take the
bigger slice of this growing market is the one that will
offer lowest technology migration overhead/barrier, provided that they
follow uC chip lowest prices too. LPCXpresso will put NXP's ahead.*
*
*
*Also, by intensely lowering the technology migration costs the electronics
market entrance barriers would be brought down as well, so more and more
small companies would be able to sell electronic devices, witch would be a
gift to the world's economy growth.*
*
*
*I hoped NXP's cortex m0 strategy would go deeper in this line of though.*
*
*
*att.*
*
*
*2011/1/29 rtstofer
*
>
> * *
>
> *
>
> --- In l... , "Felipe de
> Andrade Neves L." wrote:
> >
> > *Hello,**
> *
> > *
> > *
> > *I've been reading some documentation about the LPCXpresso, I found this
> > board is really smart due to the junction of jtag and target at the same
> > board.*
> > *
> > *
> *
> * > *But I have a question, s**eems that the modifications made at the
> eclipse*
> *
> > IDE isn't free, and has firmware limitations, what whould be the
> > limitations? *
> > *(bad nxp move here, the cheaper the better, free, even better for
> > massifying lpc chips)*
> > *
> > *
> > *And, I am very into linux and free softaware, is it possible to use the
> > jtag using a free enviroment running on linux? I run a blog in portuguese
> > (BR) language about free embedded system - selivre.wordpress.com, I am
> > looking foward to use free enviroment with the LPCXpresso board. *
> > *
> > *
> *
> * > *Att.*
> > Code Red is in the BUSINESS of selling software, Embedded Artists makes
> money building the boards and NXP sells chips. Everybody is in the game for
> money. Nothing wrong with that!
>
> If you want to use the LPC-Link gadget, you probably have to play by Code
> Red's rules. The limitation is clearly specified: the FREE version of the
> IDE can only download 128 KB while the unlimited version ($1000) can
> download 512 KB.
>
> Maybe someone will eventually get the LPC-Link device to work with OpenOCD
> but it'll probably be a while.
>
> Why get hung up on a vendor specific JTAG approach when OpenOCD will work
> with a lot of dongles? There are a lot of LPC1xxx boards although the
> LPCXpresso price is compelling ($30).
>
> Alas, the pricing just isn't compelling enough to want to install yet
> another IDE/toolchain with limited download capabilities.
>
> Richard
>
> *
>
> **
>

--- In l..., "Felipe de Andrade Neves L." wrote:
>
> *Hello,*
> *
> *
> *I've been reading some documentation about the LPCXpresso, I found this
> board is really smart due to the junction of jtag and target at the same
> board.*
> *
> *
> *But I have a question, s**eems that the modifications made at the eclipse
> IDE isn't free, and has firmware limitations, what whould be the
> limitations? *
> *(bad nxp move here, the cheaper the better, free, even better for
> massifying lpc chips)*
> *
> *
> *And, I am very into linux and free softaware, is it possible to use the
> jtag using a free enviroment running on linux? I run a blog in portuguese
> (BR) language about free embedded system - selivre.wordpress.com, I am
> looking foward to use free enviroment with the LPCXpresso board. *
> *
> *
> *Att.*
>

Code Red is in the BUSINESS of selling software, Embedded Artists makes money building the boards and NXP sells chips. Everybody is in the game for money. Nothing wrong with that!

If you want to use the LPC-Link gadget, you probably have to play by Code Red's rules. The limitation is clearly specified: the FREE version of the IDE can only download 128 KB while the unlimited version ($1000) can download 512 KB.

Maybe someone will eventually get the LPC-Link device to work with OpenOCD but it'll probably be a while.

Why get hung up on a vendor specific JTAG approach when OpenOCD will work with a lot of dongles? There are a lot of LPC1xxx boards although the LPCXpresso price is compelling ($30).

Alas, the pricing just isn't compelling enough to want to install yet another IDE/toolchain with limited download capabilities.

Richard