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
> >
> >
>

Start a New Thread

*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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> Start a New Thread

--- 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

Start a New Thread