14421Re: Alternative to code worrier?
- Aug 1, 2012
> Sorry if I sound a little cranky - things have been more than a little hectic lately and it's been a week since I've had a full night's sleep. I'm going to go try to fix that now.Not a problem. I hope that I didn't sound confrontational in my post. I was just making geek talk.
I got my tracker3 and am working on setting it up. Like you, I have had some tiring days at work. So it may be this weekend before I have it up an running.
--- In email@example.com, Scott Miller <scott@...> wrote:
> On 7/30/2012 7:58 PM, Bruce C wrote:
> > I see that as a major bummer. I was looking for something that I could
> > mod and make available in the Open Source community. If you need to buy
> > a compiler, they won't support it.
> > What is the damage for a CodeWarrier the is useful? I know that some of
> > the more advanced versions go for several $K.
> The free version should compile the T2 and OTUSB code since they're
> under 64k. For the T3 you'd need the basic license, which runs about
> $400/year. However, I'm almost certain there ARE alternatives for the
> Coldfire architecture - I'm just not going that route myself because
> it's easier for me to keep everything in one development environment.
> You can also get a trial license for CW if you're just making a one-time
> change and can get it done in a month.
> > May I suggest redesigning for something like AVR, ARM or something else
> > that has good hobbies support.
> I've got 10 years of experience with the HC(S)08 processors, about 20
> years if you count the HC11 and older 6800 family and semi-related
> 6502/6510/8502. I'm not as attached to Coldfire, but I tried ARM and
> wasn't terribly impressed and Coldfire's got some things going for it in
> MIPS/watt and cost.
> I don't mean to seem insensitive to the needs of hobbyists, but I have
> to work with this stuff every day for a living and honestly only a
> handful of people have ever bothered to do anything aside from the most
> minor tweaks to the OpenTracker and Tracker2 source code. I can't make
> major changes to my selection of tools for the convenience of a very
> small number of casual hobbyists, especially when there are
> free-as-in-beer options available. It would be different if there was a
> large, active community contributing to the code, but out of maybe
> 30,000 lines of code I think around 10 were contributed by others.
> There's been even less interest since the introduction of the script
> system, and when I have the time to expand the script language further I
> think that will satisfy most people's needs for customization.
> I've seriously considered taking the Tracker3 closed source, since I
> *do* depend on selling this stuff to pay the rent, and there's a lot of
> work put into things like the USB bootloader that are horribly tedious
> to write and debug but yield a competitive advantage in the long run.
> Most hobbyists don't care about the $5 it would cost to slap an FTDI
> chip on a tracker and avoid all of that mess entirely, but for a
> production device that's a savings of thousands of dollars a year. So
> while the hobbyist saves $5, I'm potentially facing a real loss of
> competitive advantage by putting that code out there and maybe saving a
> competitor $5 per device.
> But I *do* care about the open source movement and I think the benefits
> generally outweigh the risks, so I'm keeping it open. And I'm always
> happy when someone does take a genuine interest in the project and uses
> it to build something new and different, but at the end of the day I
> have to go with what keeps me productive and best serves the majority of
> the end users.
> Sorry if I sound a little cranky - things have been more than a little
> hectic lately and it's been a week since I've had a full night's sleep.
> I'm going to go try to fix that now.
- << Previous post in topic