Mega128 development board

Go To Last Post
10 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Can anyone comment on the BDMICRO MAVRIC-IIB board?
I could not find current information here at freaks.com
The last entry I found is 2005. Thanks

I'll believe corporations
are people when Texas executes one.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

I could not find current information here at freaks.com

That's usually a pretty strong indication of the popularity of something and if no one is using a board, however good a design it may be, you could be hard pressed to find others to bounce questions off about it's operation.

What is is specifically that attracts yoU to that board? Is it the fact it uses a >10 year old CPU so very old development tools can be used? Is it the RC Servo driving stuff? Are you specifically looking for something to design a robot around?

In this day and age if someone were looking for a board with a 128K (or even 256K) micro on board I think a lot of people would be drawn to the Arduino Mega. There are 10's of thousands of users, 100's of add-on boards ("shields") a mass of pre-existing library code and so on.

A lot of people say "yeah but I don't want to be tied to using the Arduino IDE and it's "noddy" language" and "I want the possibility of attaching a JTAG debugger and programming/debugging that way. The fact is that all those things are possible with Arduino anyway.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

It looks fine.

Note that there are many other mega128 boards.

I would choose according to the style of header you like. I prefer box headers.

Is it for development or a working device?

Also note that a mega2560 may be more common.
The mega128 is an old chip.

David.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

clawson wrote:
tubecut wrote:

I could not find current information here at freaks.com

In this day and age if someone were looking for a board with a 128K (or even 256K) micro on board I think a lot of people would be drawn to the Arduino Mega. There are 10's of thousands of users, 100's of add-on boards ("shields") a mass of pre-existing library code and so on.

A lot of people say "yeah but I don't want to be tied to using the Arduino IDE and it's "noddy" language" and "I want the possibility of attaching a JTAG debugger and programming/debugging that way. The fact is that all those things are possible with Arduino anyway.

I've been using the Adrino Mega with the ATmega1280 for quite a while now. In fact, I've been using the Adrino with the thru-hole ATMega328 for several years.

When I get a new Adrino board, the very first thing I do is remove the 10.000MHz crystal and install an 18.432MHz crystal (one of the "Magic" USART crystal frequencies) so I obtain ZERO BAUD rate error.

From there, it's the ImageCraft C compiler for program development, AVRStudio for the object programming and the ATAVR MKII USB programmer.

But of course, if you are an Assembly or GCC proponent, you don't have the expense of the ImageCraft compiler because AVRStudio already incorporates these things - and so much more...

You can avoid reality, for a while.  But you can't avoid the consequences of reality! - C.W. Livingston

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

I do is remove the 10.000MHz

I'm guessing you meant 16.000 MHz?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Clawson, I was asking if anyone had comments about the board. Instead you presented a lot of questions about why I might be interested in that particular circuit board.:?:
Actually I do like the connectors used on the board and some of the options and also there are several add on boards, standard I/O types, relays and opto's for inputs. Ofcourse, many different vendors can also supply these as well.

For my needs (experimental), the age of that processor is not much of a problem. I am not going into high volume production or anything such as that.
At this point in time I have very little interest in RC stuff.
I was thinking the board had an option that did not include the RC hardware.
I did like the RTC and battery ability.

I don't want to solder boards if I can help it. I have wired and experimented over a dozen Olimex AVR boards and I am getting tired of doing that. At 69 , eyesight is not what it used to be.

What got my attention was an older document from BDMICRO that was instructions on installing the GCC tools on my linux based PC. I have had installation problems using CODE::BLOCKS and had been trying many approaches from various online sources. So, after reading the brochure on that subject, I decided to check out the actual hardware produced by the company.

Quote:
I think a lot of people would be drawn to the Arduino Mega. There are 10's of thousands of users, 100's of add-on boards ("shields") a mass of pre-existing library code and so on.
, I already have a UNO board and the software works good. I don't care for using the bootloader. Also the board layout(s) have that pin offset sizing which prevents easy proto board construction is a problem for me.

I will take another look at the Arduion mega boards, but the BDMICRO board looks pretty good as far as I can tell. It has more I/O than the AVR's I have been using , mainly the mega series. I don't have a strong interest in using 'shields' as for my usage (experimenting) I would rather use the proto-boards I have already built.

Also, I have been using the ICCAVR compiler but I have not enjoyed when ICC changed the IDE. I still have the older ICCAVR v7.x for my XP PRO machine. I really would be happy to be able to use the Linux OS for the Atmel micro's.

What I was really interested in was to hear from anyone who has used the BDMICRO board and if there were any comments and or complaints.

I'll believe corporations
are people when Texas executes one.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Quote:

Instead you presented a lot of questions about why I might be interested in that particular circuit board.

Yes I'm saying it's not a good choice as there seems little use/support so I was asking what attracted you to this board so that myself and others here could make recommendations of boards we know of that feature similar processor or similar features and that are known to be widely used and supported. I thought that was obvious. But if you are set on the board presented then why not just buy it? (in which case this thread is kind of pointless isn't it?).

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

david.prentice:

Quote:
It looks fine.

David, have you used the board or dealt with the company?
I think they are located in North Carolina (USA) and must not be a very big company.

I'll believe corporations
are people when Texas executes one.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

No, I have not used it.

I certainly agree about 'no soldering'.
At the same time, you want 'secure' connections.
I would choose whatever suits 'my' other boards.

As Cliff has said, that particular board has not had much comment here. This either means that it has few owners or it has no problems.

David.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Try PM'ing bobgardner, I think he has one of their MCU boards ( I may be wrong ), and he definitely has the 512 KB RAM board.

1) Studio 4.18 build 716 (SP3)
2) WinAvr 20100110
3) PN, all on Doze XP... For Now
A) Avr Dragon ver. 1
B) Avr MKII ISP, 2009 model
C) MKII JTAGICE ver. 1