.NET micro framework ... end of embedded world???

What is he future? ARMs are coming down in price. Microsoft has made micro framework license free. Creating firmware has become high level (C#), cheap, and perhaps the next big thing?

Will asm/C go the way of the dinosaur? Will 8 bit micros become obsolete?

Reply to
Andrew
Loading thread data ...

.net is not even a single molecule in the ocean. And asm/c are not the beginning and ending of programming languages in embedded systems.

Reply to
larwe

Do 8051's handle multi-megabyte object files now?

--
Scott
Validated Software
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Not Really Me

The future is there is going to be more and more idiots like you.

VLV

Reply to
Vladimir Vassilevsky

If Microsoft have made the mocro framework free (as in beer or open source ?) I suspect that it is because they can't gain any market traction by selling it.

Last time I looked it needed a lot of resource to run (RAM and ROM) - far more than I have ever embedded in a micro based project.

So micro frameowrk based systems won't be replacing 8 bit micros (or 32 bit ones in many applications) any time soon.

Michael Kellett

Reply to
MK

"There is no magic bullet". But marketing will always tell you they have one. In high volume applications, the unit cost is the most important factor, so the development environment may not even be relevant. ARMs have always been coming down in price, and we have been using high-level language for years, so don't expect a revolution from a language which is worse in terms of embedded performance. Opening up development to script kiddies is unlikely to benefit the industry significantly.

Unlikely. The more likely scenario is that they will continue to dominate in particular niches, and unit cost will always be an issue. New higher power platforms tend to create new niches, where 8 bitters were never used, eg. set top boxes.

You really need to understand the current market place before speculating about the future. Do some research into current embedded projects broken down by language and architecture. The results may surprise you. Many years after C++, C still dominates, and more 8- bitters are sold than ever before.

Reply to
Bob

C++ flopped for embedded. EC++ never made it to mainstream. C remains the staple for small firmware projects.

Its remained that way for 30 years. Seems like change is inevitable. But when and what? If the cost is the same for 8bit vs. 32bit then its logical that something else is possible in the not so distant future.

The question is will it be something like C# micro framework?

Reply to
Andrew

No, the purpose in promoting micro framework is to establish a beachhead in a market where Microsoft has never been successful, with a proprietary programming language controlled by Microsoft, and thereby to steer larger projects towards laughably unpopular operating systems such as WinCE.

You really are a troll.

Reply to
larwe

It may well be that embedded goes down the drain like PCs did decades ago (being Intel & MS based makes them useless to me except for TV-set like usage).

But I am not sure MS are there yet. How large a memory footprint will something based on that stuff have? If cost does not matter, power consumption will likely continue to do so - and larger code size means not only more memory to be kept powered, but more memory accesses, each costing power. Same goes for the wider bus.

For example, recently I introduced this:

formatting link
. Being remotely accessible via RFB (at 100 MbpS this is seamless, at 10 it is OK to work with); complete DPS plus the complete nuclear spectrometry software fit in < 2 megabytes of flash, *non-compressed* (mostly in a disk-like image, about 64K of "bios" code). And I have not even begun to optimize for code size (have a reserve for old, 68-k targeted code, which could buy me another 25 to 50% - not sure about the exact figure). How does that MS thing compare to these figures? (I don't know the answer, may be they can beat me...).

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments

formatting link

------------------------------------------------------

formatting link

Original message:

formatting link

Reply to
Didi

I'm also worried about that. And by "worried", I mean "scared". A lot of embedded development is in contexts where mistakes can kill people.

The problem isn't necessarily with the tools per se, but with the "culture" which surrounds them.

PC development (and I include Windows, Linux, and Mac here) has a culture where deadlines take priority and any bugs are dealt with by an endless stream of patches. Embedded development doesn't work that way.

Reply to
Nobody

t
.

I believe you are understating how messy the PC development is from a software point of view. It is a whole culture (or rather lack thereof) of wasting resources, sometimes deliberately (to have new hardware sold). A PC is no more efficient than a 4 seat car sized as an apartment block on thousands of differently sized, awkwardly coupled and mostly synchronized wheels.

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments

formatting link

------------------------------------------------------

formatting link

Reply to
Didi

I don't think the OP will find many people supporting embedded .NET. Not here anyway. I am by heart a linux user, and also a windows user when forced to. Microsoft has earned a bad reputation among many 'expert' users. I think people shouldn't underestimate the achievements of microsoft in the later years. A good part of the problems with different Windows versions are not Microsoft fault, but often third party problems. Microsoft is (arguably) responsible of a great part of current state of computers. (for good and...)

But then, there is linux that does the same, if not much better. A whole different philosophy.

In recent years the whole software industry has lost north. New software is full of useless characteristics, full of bugs etc. Embedded is (and should be) a completely different scene. No bugs allowed. No patching. No updating. Well, more or less. As for the future, everything is possible. While high level languages are interesting and possible, so is lower lever. FPGAs, soft CPUS etc.

I share the fear/concern regarding new people entering the field. I am also concerned with management who can't tell the differences between simple and complex developments. I fear managers that buy the idea of simplicity. But then, they should be more concerned than me.

Regards

Josep Duran

Reply to
Josep Duran

C++ is probably the second most popular language for embedded development these days. I don't know the statistics, but I'd guess it to be more popular than assembly or java.

C++ has a reputation for adding bloat (in size and runtime) compared to C, especially for small systems. That can certainly be true if you don't know what you are doing, and don't understand how your compiler works (this is typical for programmers with a PC programming background). If you use decent tools and understand how they work, you can write C++ code for 8-bit micros with very little overhead.

So while C++ is an underdog compared to C in embedded projects, it is far from "flopped".

EC++ is just C++ with some bits missing. The theory was it would avoid the "bloat" - in practice, it avoids some of the more useful features that would improve development with no run-time or code space costs. So most people who might have been interested in EC++ simply use C++ compilers with flags like "-fno-rtti" and "-fno-exceptions", and avoid the STL.

Correct.

Your logic is somewhat twisted. If it were correct that C had been the staple for 30 years (it hasn't - assembly used to be much more common, although C was used with bigger devices and bigger projects), then it would seem to me that a /continued dominance/ of C is inevitable. A long-term constant is not exactly a typical sign of an impending change!

In fact, given the rate at which new processors and architectures come and go in the embedded world, the dominance of C is an outstanding consistency.

First, the cost of 8-bit micros and 32-bit micros is /not/ the same, nor will it ever be. The processor is just one of the features of a microcontroller, and one that many developers consider a minor point (mainly due to the fact that you can program them all in the same language - C). You might be able to get a 32-bit micro for the same price as some 8-bit micros - but the feature set, including things like voltage ranges, power consumption, ease of use - will be different. The embedded development community likes a wide choice, and it likes a consistency of devices across projects - 8-bit micros will remain popular for a long time even if they were more expensive.

The answer is no. Even though the micro framework has an Apache license, few people that are not already committed MS fanboys would trust anything from them - even if there were any technical reasons to choose it.

Reply to
David Brown

The theory was suppliers could keep selling obsolete C++ compilers by coming up with a new name.

Reply to
nospam

What was the project, and what volumes, and future-change targets ?

Quite a few low volume applications, have a wide range of possible solution candidates.

Not quite, The thread topic seems to confuse Microprocessor, with Microcontroller.

Most high volume embedded designs, use Microcontrollers : Single chip devices, with fixed Code and Ram. The software also tends to be fixed.

Microcontrollers use external memory, and commonly have operating systems, and even .net baggage too. On these systems, software update are common, and there are after- market applications sold as well.

Sure. the latter category ARE getting physically smaller, but they will NEVER display Microcontrollers.

-jg

Reply to
-jg

Uh, you are quoting something I didn't write and attaching my name.

As for being a "troll", just because you find a topic disturbing, doesn't mean others don't find it interesting.

Reply to
Andrew

I'm sure you meant microprocessor on next line.

.NET micro framework WILL run on single chip microcontroller.

formatting link
That is what this thread is about.

Reply to
Andrew

This gets back to what is an embedded system.

I am sure M$ has its sights on iPhones and the like, not real embedded systems like motor drives and instrumentation.

In the 80s, the Z80 and 8086 covered the landscape with embedded system hidden for public view to the TRS-80 Business machine.

As each generation of new processors hit the market, business application gets more CPU power to run.

Once the internet hit, there was not ever enough CPU and Graphics horsepower.

I for one have seen M$ steal the term "embedded" to mean something that I have never worked with.

I like many (most) here, work in the real embedded world. Having a 32-bit processor is really nice when algorithms get very complicated.

But resource limited (read cost limited) processors are whats in the embedded world.

So, if the OP wants to build a new app for the iPhone or whatever, he is just building a high level app like what a CPM/PC/MAC has been doing for years, not doing real embedded work.

don

Reply to
don

I hadn't thought of that, but it does make a sort of sense. While you can argue that omitting all support for exceptions and rtti saves runtime costs, omitting template support saves nothing (it only costs if you use templates badly) - but many earlier C++ compilers had poor or missing template support.

However, without further evidence I'll have to assume EC++ was conceived with the best of intentions, and simply botched.

Reply to
David Brown

It's not much of a quotation, but you did in fact write the quoted line.

A "troll" is someone who deliberately makes provocative statements or questions designed mainly to irritate people. I don't believe you are "trolling", but I can certainly see why some here view you as such.

The simple fact is that MS in general, and dotnet in particular (micro or not) is so far out of line with /real/ embedded development that many experienced engineers here will think you are either a troll, an astroturfer (someone who, for their own financial gain, pretends to be genuinely enthusiastic about a product), or you are simply ignorant and inexperienced in the field of embedded development, and have been duped by marketing.

Given your email address, it would be easy to think that you are an astroturfer - you are trying to drum up support and enthusiasm for this framework or products using it, presumably because Blackstone has invested in companies promoting it. The flaw in this theory is that astroturfers seldom use a valid email address.

Of course, it is also conceivable that this micro framework is useful for some applications and some developers. I can't deny having a certain prejudice against anything with "Microsoft" and "embedded" in the same sentence (though I use Windows on desktops for pragmatic reasons) - MS has build up a very clear reputation over many years that I believe justifies this prejudice.

Nonetheless, the topic is interesting, and the thread would be rather boring without someone who thinks the framework has its merits!

Reply to
David Brown

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.