Intel copies Arduino

and price isn't outlandish either.

Possible Operating Systems:

Linux Ubuntu (32-bit, 64-bit), Mac OS X version 10.8.5 (also tested on Mac OS X 10.6.8, 10.7.5, and 10.9 developer preview), Windows 7 (32-bit, 64-bit) and Windows 8

On a sunny day (Wed, 30 Oct 2013 18:32:42 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

Mini PCIe may be useful for some. Price 57 Euro, bit above Raspi, but not much.

What about Win3.11, PCDOS, Win95, Win98SE, Win2K, and WinXP?

Den torsdag den 31. oktober 2013 02.32.42 UTC+1 skrev John Larkin:

from what I read all the io is in an I2C io expander so you would be lucky to get a few 100Hz update rate, 1000's of times slower than an old school parallelport

-Lasse

The I2C on the Galileo is 100kHz and the CY8C9540A needs minimum 4 bytes, so if the processor runs a loop that is prioritized for the I2C it should be able to update faster than 2kHz

It looks like it has a number of dedicated IOs for faster access (INT0, INT2 etc)

Cheers

Klaus

One of the nice things on this board is the windows compability, so you could run a Labview program on it (not possible on the Raspberry Pi)

The very nice thing is the ADC which the Raspberry Pi lacks.

Cheers

Klaus

On a sunny day (Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:07:57 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Klaus Kragelund wrote in :

That is contra, not a pro. :-)

Un-like the rPI, there is no video out !

You you can add a Mini-PCI video, but that is extra cost !! And which video cards are compatible ?

• 400MHz 32-bit Intel® Pentium instruction set

Big leap backwards !

• 10-pin Standard JTAG header for debugging

Has anyone found the correct jtag device to sue with this ?

I will buy one to play with for sure. ;-)

hamilton

Yeah, the specs claim 14 port pins but the block diagram doesn't show 14. Maybe they are including some of the SPI pins. Intel has increasingly hid their CPUs behind PCIe and USB walls and such, and eliminated any means of memory mapped i/o or fast parallel port bits.

Culturally, they seem afraid of having a generation of kids grow up playing with PIC and ARM architectures on Arduino and Beagle and Zed type boards.

How is that a copy of Arduino?

Just to clarify, those are development operating systems, not operating systems supported by the board.

Read the blurb.

Yes, but how long until Intel yet again loses interest in supplying parts for embedded systems?

"Shields are boards that can be plugged on top of the Arduino PCB extending its capabilities. The different shields follow the same philosophy as the original toolkit: they are easy to mount, and cheap to produce."

Then Intel says: "It?s the first board based on Intel® architecture designed to be hardw are and software pin-compatible with Arduino shields designed for the Uno R

Since Arduino was conceived to eliminate much of the start-up headache of u sing crap products like Intel, I seriously doubt the Arduino customer base will give Intel a second thought.

Yes. What's interesting is that Intel is concerned enough to mimic the Arduino boards. They may be feeling their entire market slipping away.

ON/OFF with a few year period. But maybe this time they are scared.

The era of the big-iron xxx hundred dollar chip may be fading. Tablets may go ARM. Server farms may go ARM.

OTOH, this is a bit more powerful than the average Arduino board. It might not be a bad idea to put a FPGA on the mPCIe slot.

the have the same connectors as an arduino so (at least in theory) you can plug in the numerous arduino shields with all kind of peripherals

-Lasse

Den torsdag den 31. oktober 2013 21.52.26 UTC+1 skrev snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com:

I have a 1GHz Atom it works but it isn't fast, I can only imagine how slow a 400MHz "pentium" is

if you want a desktop/table OS(and don't need windows) and an FPGA, why not pick something with a Zynq? afaict much faster and none of the PCI hassle

-Lasse