Tim Wescott wrote: <snip>> > It can't be assumed that these things will have a 1:1 connection with > PC's, either -- it should be assumed that up to a dozen could all be at > work, funneling data to one PC. > > So, if YOU were going to build a device than needed to communicate with a > PC in a reasonably robust and seamless fashion, and it was going to be > fairly low production volume, and if wireless were desirable but not > necessary, how would YOU do it? >Ethernet. Hands down. TCP,UDP, it's there; you decide. You have complete separation of concern with respect to wireless.> If I were to ignore the desired "wireless" part, I think I'd be looking at > how the PLC manufacturers network their boxen on Ethernet. >Badly. That's slightly unfair, but ... PLC vendors are largely mired in *koff* MODBUS TCP - although this is changing rapidly. A Beaglebone Black has more comms capability in its little finger than most PLCs have ... all week. At least a Cubie does; you'd hope the Black does as well. This is okay; PLCs grew up differently. Learn to write select() loops in 'C' or the equivalent in a non-.., binary language of your choosing ( the nonblocking socket handlers in the Brent Welch book using Tcl are among the most beautiful software anywhere ). You can cut and paste a 'C' select() loop from the IBM website. -- Les Cargill
USB? Ethernet? Bluetooth?
Started by ●September 19, 2014
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
Tim Wescott wrote:> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 10:54:28 -0700, Don Y wrote: > >> On 9/19/2014 10:43 AM, Tim Wescott wrote: >>> To date, most of my headless embedded development has been either >>> entirely stand-alone, or has communicated with the outside world via >>> serial. >>> >>> Serial is kinda old, and getting clunky. Yes, you can use a USB to >>> serial converter from FTDI or whoever, but then you have a USB >>> connection that needs to have a baud rate specified, which is just >>> strange. >>> >>> On the other hand, USB and Bluetooth both seem to have development >>> models that demand that if you're going to do something new and unique >>> that you spend $$$$$$ to create some new class of device, with vendor >>> ID and all that associated folderol. It's nice if you're building >>> 100,000 a year or more, but not so nice if you're building a few >>> hundred per year. >>> >>> I'm working on a device that has a need for robust and graceful >>> communication with PCs. On the one hand, data rates are not at all >>> high -- once or twice a second the thing needs to report that some >>> action has happened, and possibly cough up a measurement at the same >>> time. On the other hand, they need to work in harsh environments that >>> make wired connections expensive, so having them communicate wirelessly >>> is a good thing. >> >> Are the connections expensive because of labor costs of stringing wires >> (in a "protected" manner)? Or, because of electrical noise interfering >> with those comms? Are the distances appropriate for wired *or* >> wireless? > > Connections are expensive because the device is for use around salt water, > so any wiring has to be water-tight. >IP67-rated female 4-pin D-coded M12 connector ... -- Les Cargill
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
On 2014-09-19, Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote:> On the other hand, USB and Bluetooth both seem to have development models > that demand that if you're going to do something new and unique that you > spend $$$$$$ to create some new class of device, with vendor ID and all > that associated folderol. It's nice if you're building 100,000 a year or > more, but not so nice if you're building a few hundred per year.Microchip will sublicense a USB product ID to you, using their vendor ID, at no cost. Volume is restricted to a maximum of 10K parts, and obviously you have to use a Microchip USB part.
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
Den l�rdag den 20. september 2014 19.03.54 UTC+2 skrev John Temples:> On 2014-09-19, Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> wrote: > > > On the other hand, USB and Bluetooth both seem to have development models > > > that demand that if you're going to do something new and unique that you > > > spend $$$$$$ to create some new class of device, with vendor ID and all > > > that associated folderol. It's nice if you're building 100,000 a year or > > > more, but not so nice if you're building a few hundred per year. > > > > Microchip will sublicense a USB product ID to you, using their vendor > > ID, at no cost. Volume is restricted to a maximum of 10K parts, and > > obviously you have to use a Microchip USB part.are you sure? I'm sure I read that the USB-if strictly forbids any sublicensing of IDs Someone tried something like a kicstarter to buy an ID and share it, it was quickly shut down by the USBif if you don't need to put USB logos on your stuff a Vendor ID is "only" $5000 -Lasse
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
Microchip certainly sub-licenses the VendorID; I've done so for customers for designs I've done with Microchip parts. IIRC a number of other uC vendors do the same (sorry I can't certainly name others without checking)... Hope that helps, Best Regards, Dave
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
Den l�rdag den 20. september 2014 21.41.33 UTC+2 skrev Dave Nadler:> Microchip certainly sub-licenses the VendorID; I've done > > so for customers for designs I've done with Microchip > > parts. > > > > IIRC a number of other uC vendors do the same (sorry > > I can't certainly name others without checking)... >I googled a bit and you are right most of the USB uC manufactures and also FTDI lets you use their VID I wonder how they do it? this is a part of the Vendor ID agreement .. The company set forth above hereby applies for a USB Vendor ID Number and agrees to the following: The USB Implementers Forum is the authority which assigns and maintains all USB Vendor ID Numbers. Each Vendor ID Number is assigned to one company for its sole and exclusive use, along with associated Product ID Numbers. They may not be sold, transferred, or used by others, directly or indirectly, except in special circumstances, and then only upon prior written approval by USB-IF. Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited. .. -Lasse
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
On 9/20/2014 5:22 PM, langwadt@fonz.dk wrote:> Den l�rdag den 20. september 2014 21.41.33 UTC+2 skrev Dave Nadler: >> Microchip certainly sub-licenses the VendorID; I've done >> >> so for customers for designs I've done with Microchip >> >> parts. >> >> >> >> IIRC a number of other uC vendors do the same (sorry >> >> I can't certainly name others without checking)... >> > > I googled a bit and you are right most of the USB uC manufactures > and also FTDI lets you use their VID > > I wonder how they do it? this is a part of the Vendor ID agreement > > ... > The company set forth above hereby applies for a USB Vendor ID Number and > agrees to the following: The USB Implementers Forum is the authority which > assigns and maintains all USB Vendor ID Numbers. Each Vendor ID Number is > assigned to one company for its sole and exclusive use, along with associated > Product ID Numbers. They may not be sold, transferred, or used by others, > directly or indirectly, except in special circumstances, and then only upon > prior written approval by USB-IF. Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned > USB Vendor ID Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly > prohibited."They may not be sold, transferred, or used by others, directly or indirectly, except in special circumstances, and then only upon prior written approval by USB-IF." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ -- Rick
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:33:45 -0400, rickman wrote:> On 9/20/2014 5:22 PM, langwadt@fonz.dk wrote: >> Den lørdag den 20. september 2014 21.41.33 UTC+2 skrev Dave Nadler: >>> Microchip certainly sub-licenses the VendorID; I've done >>> >>> so for customers for designs I've done with Microchip >>> >>> parts. >>> >>> >>> >>> IIRC a number of other uC vendors do the same (sorry >>> >>> I can't certainly name others without checking)... >>> >>> >> I googled a bit and you are right most of the USB uC manufactures and >> also FTDI lets you use their VID >> >> I wonder how they do it? this is a part of the Vendor ID agreement >> >> ... >> The company set forth above hereby applies for a USB Vendor ID Number >> and agrees to the following: The USB Implementers Forum is the >> authority which assigns and maintains all USB Vendor ID Numbers. Each >> Vendor ID Number is assigned to one company for its sole and exclusive >> use, along with associated Product ID Numbers. They may not be sold, >> transferred, or used by others, directly or indirectly, except in >> special circumstances, and then only upon prior written approval by >> USB-IF. Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID >> Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited. > > > "They may not be sold, transferred, or used by others, directly or > indirectly, except in special circumstances, and then only upon prior > written approval by USB-IF." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Which you can probably get if you're ginormous. -- www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
On 20/09/2014 22:49, tim wrote:> On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:33:45 -0400, rickman wrote: > >> On 9/20/2014 5:22 PM, langwadt@fonz.dk wrote: >>> Den lørdag den 20. september 2014 21.41.33 UTC+2 skrev Dave Nadler: >>>> Microchip certainly sub-licenses the VendorID; I've done >>>> >>>> so for customers for designs I've done with Microchip >>>> >>>> parts. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> IIRC a number of other uC vendors do the same (sorry >>>> >>>> I can't certainly name others without checking)... >>>> >>>> >>> I googled a bit and you are right most of the USB uC manufactures and >>> also FTDI lets you use their VID >>> >>> I wonder how they do it? this is a part of the Vendor ID agreement >>> >>> ... >>> The company set forth above hereby applies for a USB Vendor ID Number >>> and agrees to the following: The USB Implementers Forum is the >>> authority which assigns and maintains all USB Vendor ID Numbers. Each >>> Vendor ID Number is assigned to one company for its sole and exclusive >>> use, along with associated Product ID Numbers. They may not be sold, >>> transferred, or used by others, directly or indirectly, except in >>> special circumstances, and then only upon prior written approval by >>> USB-IF. Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID >>> Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited. >> >> >> "They may not be sold, transferred, or used by others, directly or >> indirectly, except in special circumstances, and then only upon prior >> written approval by USB-IF." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Which you can probably get if you're ginormous.I suspect a decision allowing FTDI and other vendors to sub-licence ID numbers from from a hope the USB standard would expand. Otherwise some other standard such as Firewire could have been adopted as the de-facto standard for specialist equipment that requires an interface to a PC. -- Mike Perkins Video Solutions Ltd www.videosolutions.ltd.uk
Reply by ●September 20, 20142014-09-20
On 9/20/2014 5:49 PM, tim wrote:> On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:33:45 -0400, rickman wrote: > >> On 9/20/2014 5:22 PM, langwadt@fonz.dk wrote: >>> Den lørdag den 20. september 2014 21.41.33 UTC+2 skrev Dave Nadler: >>>> Microchip certainly sub-licenses the VendorID; I've done >>>> >>>> so for customers for designs I've done with Microchip >>>> >>>> parts. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> IIRC a number of other uC vendors do the same (sorry >>>> >>>> I can't certainly name others without checking)... >>>> >>>> >>> I googled a bit and you are right most of the USB uC manufactures and >>> also FTDI lets you use their VID >>> >>> I wonder how they do it? this is a part of the Vendor ID agreement >>> >>> ... >>> The company set forth above hereby applies for a USB Vendor ID Number >>> and agrees to the following: The USB Implementers Forum is the >>> authority which assigns and maintains all USB Vendor ID Numbers. Each >>> Vendor ID Number is assigned to one company for its sole and exclusive >>> use, along with associated Product ID Numbers. They may not be sold, >>> transferred, or used by others, directly or indirectly, except in >>> special circumstances, and then only upon prior written approval by >>> USB-IF. Unauthorized use of assigned or unassigned USB Vendor ID >>> Numbers and associated Product ID Numbers are strictly prohibited. >> >> >> "They may not be sold, transferred, or used by others, directly or >> indirectly, except in special circumstances, and then only upon prior >> written approval by USB-IF." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Which you can probably get if you're ginormous.Yeah, that's my point. Microchip, NXP, etc have likely paid some fee and are on the panel so they get what they want and share it with us. -- Rick
