PDA

View Full Version : The battle between Teensy 3 vs MBED Freescale Freedom - who will win?



t3andy
03-04-2013, 02:36 AM
MBED
Freescale Freedom MKL25Z128VLK4
Cost: $12.95 USD
Kinetis 32 bit ARM Cortex M0+
48 MHz
Overclocking: No
Flash: 128K
SRAM: 16 K
Analog In: 6
Analog bits: 16
Touch: NO
PWM: 6
SPI: 1
Analog Out: 12 bit DAC
Serial HW: 2
I2C: 2
IO: 53
Compiler: Free - On-Line <----<<<
Capacitive touch slider
Accelerometer
Tri-color LED
Open SDA debug interface
Mass storge device programming
USB OTG, USB Host, USB Device
Arduino pinout connectors

PJRC
Teensy 3 Freescale MK20DX128
Cost: $19 USD
Kinetis 32 bit ARM Cortex M4
48 MHz
Overclocking: Yes
Flash: 131,072 bytes
SRAM: 16,384 bytes
Analog In: 12
Analog bits: 16
Touch: Yes 12
PWM: 10
SPI: 1
Analog Out: 0
Serial HW: 3
I2C: 1
I/O: 34
Compiler: Free - Off-Line (Arduino IDE)
Teensy bootloader programming
USB Device


Ref links:
http://mbed.org/handbook/mbed-FRDM-KL25Z
http://www.pjrc.com/teensy/

Notes: Both Freescale processors are different! The comparison is made because Freescale provides both microcontrollers.
Both PJRC and MBED provided different unique methods in hardware and software development.
Both modules or boards have different form factors. One is a ARM stamp (Teensy 3) and the other is a PCB board (Freedom).




My wager is on PJRC :cool:

Russ
03-04-2013, 02:52 AM
296

Looks like the Freescale one is BIG. So, Teensy wins for anything that needs tiny.

Freescale 52.5 by 80mm.

Teensy-3 19mm by 35mm.

Wozzy
03-04-2013, 10:33 AM
Not everything Important is given in the Specs.

Teensy 3.0
Supported by Paul: YES

MBED:
Supported by Paul: NO (but he would probably help you if you asked)

My money is on Teensy 3.0...and anxiously awaiting 3.0++

t3andy
03-04-2013, 12:37 PM
Looks like the Freescale one is BIG

An ARM microcontroller provides massive amount of GPIO in a given area. So size, in this
comparison, is a moot point. You still have to connect to the microcontroller someway unless you
are going to use the Teensy 3 on a breadboard for life. The MBED Freedom provided headers and the
Teensy provided pins for GPIO connections.

t3andy
03-04-2013, 12:39 PM
My money is on Teensy 3.0...and anxiously awaiting 3.0++

Quote from MBED ...

We'll be introducing additional mbed-enabled development platforms from Freescale (and others) in 2013.

MichaelMeissner
03-04-2013, 01:53 PM
I dunno, you seem to have binary thinking, that there must be only one winner. I tend to think it is a healthy ecosystem when you have several players, each with products that have pluses and minuses. I happen to currently drive a Honda, and my wife a Ford. I've had Toyotas and other Fords in the past, and my father had VW's when I was growing up. There are various reasons to buy one model of car from a maker over another, and the same goes for microprocessor and small computer development systems.

As an example, I have both an Arduino Uno R3 and Teensy 3.0's that I go back and forth between. Each has advantages, and sometimes I go with the Arduino and sometimes the Teensy for the one off things I do. I even take some sketches developed on one and I run it on the other.

When I was first looking around, I glanced at mbed, and I disliked their internet development system, and I haven't gotten past that to order a board. Back when they were one of the few board vendors for hobbyist setups with Arm cpus, I would think about them from time to time, but even without thinking about the development system, I thought they were overpriced.. Now that the Teeny 3.0/Arduino Due are out in the embedded space, the Raspberry Pi/pcDunio in the small computer space are out, mbed doesn't have much of a value add for me. Obviously there are other people that think they are great, and that's fine.

t3andy
03-04-2013, 02:24 PM
Compiler: Free - On-Line <----<<<


I disliked their internet development system

The devil is in the details :cool:

BTW ...
you seem to have binary thinking
I can only count to one. Funny, my siblings also complain that I only answer in yes / no or true / false. Its binary. :D

PaulStoffregen
03-04-2013, 05:14 PM
I agree with MichaelMeissner. Microcontrollers, and especially microcontroller dev boards have never been a "winner takes all" type market.

Over the next year, I'm going to be releasing a lot of nice features on Teensy 3.0 (the recent LED library is just one sign of the things to come). MBED, Arduino, Microchip, TI & maybe even ST almost certainly will publish lots of nice stuff too.

For hobbyists and entrepreneurs building electronic projects, things are only going to get better and better... a LOT better!

t3andy
03-04-2013, 05:57 PM
I was only pointing out that by looking at the Freescale Freedom many would say "WOW look at the price and what I am receiving for only $13" But, by very close inspection of the MBED "online only" development system, there are many gotchas.
Also, the quality and ease of use of development software, which the Teensy 3 provides (thanks to Paul Stoffregen) will dictate the winners from the losers.

Russ
03-04-2013, 06:07 PM
An ARM microcontroller provides massive amount of GPIO in a given area. So size, in this
comparison, is a moot point. You still have to connect to the microcontroller someway unless you
are going to use the Teensy 3 on a breadboard for life. The MBED Freedom provided headers and the
Teensy provided pins for GPIO connections.

Okey doke. I was only saying that when you want to do something tiny the Teensy wins :) In my case I needed a choice that at 3/4 inch or smaller that could be embedded in the project.

PaulStoffregen
03-04-2013, 06:18 PM
Yes, the $13 price is pretty amazing. I suspect it's a loss-leader product. Certainly no 3rd party like PJRC could make and sell that board at $13 (not to mention funding software development) while buying Freescale's chip at their regular pricing.

t3andy
03-04-2013, 06:41 PM
I suspect it's a loss-leader product Just like the TI Launchpad for the MSP430 and the Stellaris ARM. They figure many will bite and buy their boards only to
find out that their software is extremely hard to use.

ploveday
03-04-2013, 09:31 PM
Talking of interesting microcontroller products, this looks pretty cool:

http://freesoc.net/

I find the programmable peripheral and on-chip analogue capabilities of the Cypress stuff intriguing. Shame it's a bit pricey.

Won't be replacing Teensy 3 for general purposes for me, though. I think it offers the best all-round capabilities and price, and isn't ridiculously big.

- Peter

t3andy
03-04-2013, 10:10 PM
good find ... but I am going to win the lottery one day! This thread is about low cost Freescale microcontrollers that you can purchase now as we speak. Your link is "vaporware" until the "pre-orders" are shipped. They haven't sold or shipped any yet and now they are discounting the product by 25% ?

ploveday
03-04-2013, 10:41 PM
Sure they have. The kickstarter orders have shipped, or are in the process of shipping. Still on pre-order for follow up orders, though, until they clear.

Why are you only considering freescale company products? There are plenty of good ARM core chips out there.

- Peter

CheapB
03-04-2013, 10:52 PM
Yes, the $13 price is pretty amazing. I suspect it's a loss-leader product. Certainly no 3rd party like PJRC could make and sell that board at $13 (not to mention funding software development) while buying Freescale's chip at their regular pricing.

If a price difference of $6 per board is determining which DEVELOPMENT board to to use, it is time for a different hobby or better business idea. :-)
From a hobby perspective i am very happy with the Arduino IDE and the fact that there is so much code and libraries available to borrow from.
From a business perspective - in a small scale niche product, $6 shouldn't make a difference and in a large scale you probably end up with your own PCB anyway.

btw: show me any other $19 product where you get the level of FREE support and dedication you get with T3. I have certainly never seen anything like it.

t3andy
03-04-2013, 11:02 PM
Why are you only considering freescale company products? There are plenty of good ARM core chips out there.

Because both MBED and PJRC provide a quick easy to use ARM development. Of course, I could go the "bare metal" route and use CooCox Eclipse but they don't provide the already completed and tested libraries because their compiler does not support C++.
Time is money.

ploveday
03-04-2013, 11:02 PM
show me any other $19 product where you get the level of FREE support and dedication you get with T3. I have certainly never seen anything like it.

Absolutely.

t3andy
03-04-2013, 11:04 PM
btw: show me any other $19 product where you get the level of FREE support and dedication you get with T3. I have certainly never seen anything like it.

Case close.

ploveday
03-04-2013, 11:05 PM
Because both MBED and PJRC provide a quick easy to use ARM development. Of course, I could go the "bare metal" route and use CooCox Eclipse but they don't provide the already completed and tested libraries because their compiler does not support C++.
Time is money.

Sure. But that's simply not true of the Cypress stuff anyway. Free C++ compiler provided, free libraries provided, etc.

Anyway, the last thing I'm trying to do is argue against Teensy 3... it is still my system of choice.

t3andy
03-05-2013, 02:09 AM
Cypress ARM cost is very prohibitive - too rich for my wallet.

btw ...it's funny seeing the Penquins coming to shore among spectators in SA.

Constantin
03-06-2013, 07:09 PM
I presume there is a reason that Massimo called me out in the Arduino forums when I presented why I switched to the Teensy instead of the Due for my ongoing projects...

The Teensy 3.0 and its Teensy cousins are simply amazing boards, packing 5lb into a 1lb bag. Perfect for breadboards, and perfect for my applications, developing shields for specific uses and then being able to transfer the Teensy as needed from shield to shield. Overall, I expect to save money using this approach. Are there some Teensy pin layout features that I may have implemented differently? With the benefit of hindsight, perhaps, but more than anything, the Teensy 3.0 board shows a dedication getting things right, based on years of experience.

That said, it would be great if Paul could sell a pre-assembled version of the Teensy, with all pin holes and SMD pads connected. As much as it pains me to solder the RTC crystal (boy those leads are thin) I like that the crystal is not pre-installed as it gives me the choice to use whatever crystal I want. However, I feel that headers are more generic, especially if all the pin lengths and so on are similar. Just a thought and certainly not a game changer.

As for the other platforms, I'm sure they have many amazing features that are powerful, etc. "Trouble" is that the Arduino community not only has developed a boatload of code, they also make it freely available. ON top of that, the support here and there is amazing and represents a very high switching cost. Thanks but no thanks, I am sticking to Teensy and AVR...

t3andy
03-06-2013, 07:37 PM
"Trouble" is that the Arduino community not only has developed a boatload of code, they also make it freely available.

bar none ... software is the key and Paul Stoffregen has succeeded where many others have failed. Remember the Arduino compatible "Maple" (STM ARM) by the MIT geniuses?

BTW ... I have only one issue with PJRC. What would happen if Paul takes a dive skiing at the Three Sisters in Oregon and there is no one
to fill in for him? Filling in for superman will take some time.

UnaClocker
03-06-2013, 09:14 PM
Yeah, the STM32 dev boards, when not completely free, were like $11-$16 each.. Same deal as this new board.. It's a limitted time offer for their dev board. 3 years from now, you won't be able to get them, certainly not at this kind of intro price. Whereas, the Teensy's seem to have done nothing but go down in cost as the years have gone by.
And much of the reason why my STM32 boards never got used, they won't run Arduino code. Teensy does.

PaulStoffregen
03-06-2013, 09:15 PM
I remember that thread where Massimo asked for less Teensy talk. My guess is he would probably handle that situation differently now.

At the time, the Arduino Due had been released for only a matter of days.... and after a very long development cycle. I can tell you from experience there's a lot of anxiety when releasing a new product and in its early days after release. You've just invested a tremendous amount of time and usually a lot of money developing something. That first manufacturing run is nerve wracking. Later it's easy, when you have a well established sales history, but when you launch a new product, you really have no idea if it's sell, yet you have to pour money into inventory... on the heals of pouring time and money into development. Of course, you're optimistic, and you're probably feeling like the product is awesome, but at the same time you're nervous.

There is a huge emotional investment. Anyone can probably understand this on an intellectual level, but actually experiencing is really something unique, especially when it's your own company and you are personally and financially invested.

I can tell you I haven't always handled this well. At a former employer, there was one incident where I didn't respond very well to a technician who was critical about a new product I'd designed, which was just going into production. He was the sort of person who's always grumpy about everything anyway.... but he'd made some negative comments to the sales people, who of course are highly impressionable. Normally sales people trust the opinions they hear from customers, but with a new product they don't have any customer feedback yet. How well they sell something really depends on their level of enthusiasm.... and this technician's comments had them coming to me and others in engineering and even upper management asking critical questions. I was absolutely furious. I said things that, well, I don't really regret, but in hindsight I could have handled the situation much more gracefully. In the end, the product did extremely well, but after a slow start (likely due to other factors). When I left the company a few years later, it was still selling very well and commanding a large profit margin (unlike many of their other products which had aggressive price pressure from competitors). I talked with someone a few months ago who still works there, and apparently it's still selling very well.

So anyway, my long-winded point is I can really understand Massimo's position. Those first weeks when a high volume product is released are a wonderful but anxious time, where it's really easy to become defensive. Massimo and the other Arduino people have done a really great job on building a wonderful platform.... so good that it's easy for us to have extremely high expectations. They're humans just like the rest of us.

Constantin
03-06-2013, 11:24 PM
I hear you, Paul. I too have been involved with product releases ranging from the successful (helping Sub Zero build the Wolf manufacturing facility in Madison, WI and transitioning multiple product lines from drawing board to pilot production) to the not so successful (co-developing the first US outdoor gas water heater, exceeding every performance measure, costing far less than projected, etc) only to watch the client struggle on how to and eventually fail to sell the thing in appreciable quantities. There is pride in the process of creation and commercial success validates the time and energy one had invested in a given project.

That said, the Arduino project is in many ways its own worst enemy. As best as I can tell (and the analogy of the three blindfolded wise men describing an elephant to the king comes to mind here), the Arduino management team continues to largely isolate itself from the community instead of leveraging it. Management presence in the forums tends to be sparse to non-existent, as is feedback to the community when people have asked openly why, for example, your fixes to malloc.c were never implemented fully. Similarly, basic libraries continue to be buggy and people generally have better luck following their noses to experts like yourself, fatlib, gammon, etc. to find libraries that work.

So while I totally understand your point of view, Massimo and the rest of the team would do well to focus on fixing long-standing bugs in standard libraries. For example, that Strings are an official library but totally unstable is simply unacceptable. Similarly, they would have done well to follow your lead re: the ARM platform and focus on smaller chips before tackling a 100+ pin TQFP monster that was shoehorned into a Mega form factor and for whom many core hardware functionalities (such as external RAM) have been disabled by a (IMO) bungled hardware design.

For me, the 100+ pin Due platform should have been a clean sheet, new beginning - i.e. no compatibility by design with pre-existing shields to limit issues with voltage mismatches, etc. Such a clean break allows designers the freedom to create a core PCB that allows users to access all pins on the chip and take advantage of the many possibilities that such powerful chips offer. Board designs, hardware requirements, etc. have evolved - why shoehorn a current processor into an old Arduino form factor unless absolutely necessary?

I love your design because it is so compact that it is easy to breadboard, yet very powerful and embeddable. And stacking up the capabilities of the Due vs. the Teensy makes it very apparent that while the Due has some interesting features, that the Teensy runs virtual circles around it in most respects. For the price point of a due one could daisy chain multiple Teensies for the same or superior performance. My posts may have been too blunt in their assessments of the Due for Massimos taste, but I stand by those comments and he would do well to reflect on such comparisons instead of accusing me of trying to market a rivals product.

Your development of the Teensy 3.0 may very well have forced the hand of the Arduino team to release their own version of an ARM processor-based unit sooner than they were ready to. I hope the Arduino team rethinks their ARM strategy and also releases a smaller 32-bit board at a UNO price point instead of going for the largest processor that one could fit on a Mega.

hardtoneselector
03-07-2013, 04:00 PM
When I made my decission towards the teensy 3.0 it was something emotionaly,... seeing the humans behind, of course the attention kickstarter brought helped me finding the way to teensy, the tiny teensy form factor a webpage which seems created by humans and not a script, the performance promises... it just seemd for me as a beginner the best choice! I like it a lot and im courious what Paul brings up in the future! :)

igalloway
03-07-2013, 04:17 PM
Hello
I can say that I am fairly "close" with Freescale and there is much discussion that Teensy being arduino compatible is a significant factor.
My exposure to teensy actually came from a Freescale Engineer during a training we recently attended. In comparison the Freedom board is a good board, but challenging native software support out of the box. Many have been given out and purchased, but I've only observed sucess at professional engineering companies. Processor expert and their free compiler is not particlarly friendly for noobies (yet). mBed is only a first step in Freescale trying to make this board more accessible.. I think you have a reasonable window of opportunity with Teensy.

I would like to recommend:
1) make an "arduino form factor" carrier board for Teensy.. no electronics, just form factor adaptions
2) make a KL version of teensy if you can, and quickly. You have a window of opportunity here.

jsfetzik
03-07-2013, 06:29 PM
I am using Teensy because of the big feature list, in a small size, at a good price. For my current project I need at least 7 PWM outputs, the ability to run off a single 3.7V Li-Po battery and it has to fit into a 1"-1.25" diameter tube. The Teensy family fits the bill perfectly. My application uses few computing resources during normal operation, so with the Teensy 3 there is more than enough left for me to look at adding PWM audio as well.

t3andy
03-07-2013, 11:50 PM
make a KL version of teensy if you can, and quickly. You have a window of opportunity here.

and make Teensy 3 xxx the same as the Freescale Freedom?
Just stirring the pot :mad:

linuxgeek
03-08-2013, 02:21 AM
The performance in a small package was a big draw for me. The change in form factor was not an issue in regards to not fitting shields for me. Working with other arduino boards the shields confused me more than anything because they were designed for so many boards, as a newbie you had to hope to come across documentation or forum threads that would explain if it would work well or not, or what you had to do differently. Everything has been easier to get up & running on the teensy with remarkable performance. I'd like to see a teensy 3 w/ a ribbon cable for outputs on a flexible PCB. Something like this but smaller and better: http://hackaday.com/2010/06/29/fpc-arduino/

t3andy
03-08-2013, 03:03 AM
I'd like to see a teensy 3 w/ a ribbon cable for outputs on a flexible PCB

something like this which is connectorized ... attached PDF :cool:

Constantin
03-08-2013, 12:01 PM
Excellent implementation. A great illustration of how you can take advantage of the tiny form factor and yet not lose any of the inputs.

t3andy
03-08-2013, 12:43 PM
yet not lose any of the inputs
There was not enough room to pick up the GPIO on the bottom or back of the Teensy 3.:(

PaulStoffregen
03-08-2013, 06:57 PM
There was not enough room to pick up the GPIO on the bottom or back of the Teensy 3.:(

Is said exact that MANY times while trying to fit those 14 pads on the back side and route all the traces and place vias. It was incredibly difficult, but eventually I got every trace routed, and without placing any traces on layer2 (which is a ground plane).

Still, those extra signals were chosen to be the least often needed. The ones on the outside edges have all the nice peripheral features.

Constantin
03-08-2013, 11:42 PM
I consider the design of the teensy 3 to be amazing. Such a large chip compared you the size of the board is an amazing achievement. IIRC, the the reason these pads came into existence in the first place was that the lower-pin count chip that Paul wanted to use did not materialize and rather than ignore pins as the Arduino team has (not all pins are broken out on the due processor!!!) he put in the sweat equity to make those pins / pads accessible for the enthusiasts.

A big tip of the hat to you!

t3andy
03-09-2013, 08:13 PM
make a KL version of teensy if you can, and quickly. You have a window of opportunity here.

I like to point out by switching the Teensy 3 K20 to the KL verison (low power) will reduce the output drive current in half. :(

Dozer
03-12-2013, 09:53 AM
From the mbed website:


All mbed-enabled hardware is supported by the mbed.org developer website, including a lightweight Online Compiler and developer tools taht work on Windows, Linux or Mac OS X.

Also included is a C/C++ SDK for productive high-level programming of peripherals. Combined with the wealth of libraries and code examples being published by the mbed community, the platform provides a productive environment for getting things done.

Is that C/C++ SDK something that was added very recently? I admit, I've never used an online dev environment, it can't be as absurd as my gut reaction says it is.

t3andy
03-12-2013, 10:04 PM
Is that C/C++ SDK something that was added very recently?

No. Its MBED's generic keywords and libraries just like the Arduino keywords (functions) and libraries.


I've never used an online dev environment, it can't be as absurd as my gut reaction says it is.

Its for rapid hardware and software development but its only for "on-line" use only. There are ways to export to an off-line compiler but it will cost you for an non generic compiler AND keep in mind that, with any C/C++ compiler, compiler optimization separates the expensive compilers from the inferior compilers.

BambooSam
03-13-2013, 04:25 PM
Not everything Important is given in the Specs.

Teensy 3.0
Supported by Paul: YES

MBED:
Supported by Paul: NO (but he would probably help you if you asked)

My money is on Teensy 3.0...and anxiously awaiting 3.0++

Exactly, Paul never misses a beat.

MichaelMeissner
03-13-2013, 05:22 PM
Its for rapid hardware and software development but its only for "on-line" use only. There are ways to export to an off-line compiler but it will cost you for an non generic compiler AND keep in mind that, with any C/C++ compiler, compiler optimization separates the expensive compilers from the inferior compilers.
Ummm, just because a compiler is freely available (i.e. GCC), doesn't mean that it is inferior. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. You have to do the benchmarking yourself. In the 25+ years that I've worked on GCC, I've had many examples where GCC produced better/faster code than the commercial compilers, and many other examples where it doesn't (and obviously I try to fix those places where I can).

What a lot of the expensive embedded environments buy you is support in case something goes wrong, better debuggers than using blinky lights or print statements, an IDE if you are into that sort of thing, libraries tuned to a given chip, etc.
:cool:

Qumefox
03-13-2013, 06:25 PM
better debuggers than using blinky lights or print statements

Hey now. The more blinky lights, the better. IMHO. :rolleyes:

MichaelMeissner
03-13-2013, 07:20 PM
Hey now. The more blinky lights, the better. IMHO. :rolleyes:
However, if your blinky lights cause your Teensy to go over its power limit because you have 20 lights on all drawing power at the same time, it might not be as good.

I'm old enough that I started programming on cards, and I'm used to debug with print statements (or blinky lights), but I've seen some programmers that are lost without a full GUI debugger.

t3andy
03-13-2013, 11:36 PM
Ummm, just because a compiler is freely available (i.e. GCC), doesn't mean that it is inferior. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. You have to do the benchmarking yourself.

The MBED on-line compiler must be one highly optimized compiler because others who ported to another off-line compiler did not get a good as results (RAM/Flash usage) as the on-line compiler.

There lies another problem. Switching from the on-line to off-line, the functions and libraries will not work 100% because they were constructed with the "special" MBED on-line compiler. JMHO

MichaelMeissner
03-14-2013, 12:13 AM
The MBED on-line compiler must be one highly optimized compiler because others who ported to another off-line compiler did not get a good as results (RAM/Flash usage) as the on-line compiler.

There lies another problem. Switching from the on-line to off-line, the functions and libraries will not work 100% because they were constructed with the "special" MBED on-line compiler. JMHO
Or the people doing the setup of the off-line compiler didn't properly tune the compiler and libraries, which is the value add that presumably the mbed team did. Tuning libraries and compiler options for a chip does involve a lot of work. Just putting on -O and hoping for the best usually does not give the best results. A lot of the value add that Paul does is such tuning of the libraries.

Constantin
03-15-2013, 06:23 PM
But I would avoid an on-line compiler at all costs for the simple reason that it has the same critical failure point as DRM'd games that require a online connection to function. The minute the company shuts down the server, your 'investment' is toast. Thanks but no thanks, I want the compiler to sit on my machine so I can continue to tweak / change / edit my programs as needed. There is no way I would let someone else dictate under what circumstances I get to program my little embedded controller.

t3andy
03-22-2013, 03:55 PM
Since I started this thread or topic then its only fair to report my "unbias" opinion using the
real MBED Freescale Freedom FRDM-KL25Z hardware and MBED's on-line software.

The other day USPS delivered Mouser's $13 (USD) Freescale Freedom FRDM-KL25Z to my doorstep. I also
bought the custom made BUD enclosure for the Freescale Freedom. The reset has to be
pressed on every download and getting to this tact switch you really had to open
this enclosure up every time? (BUD Industries should have known better with this very poor design)
They got me for $9. (USD)

Please note: BUD's enclosure does contain an external slot for the tact reset but it is so inconvenient to use
due to the fact the tac switch is at a right angle and is recessed.

OK, I have to say that MBED's on-line firmware or user application USB uploading "drag and drop" is very slick and easy to use.

There were several "pre-made" test example programs made for the on-board 3-axis accelerometer, RGB LED
and the capacitive touch sensor. Importing these test programs and uploading them all worked without
a hitch.

Ok, turning on/off LEDs is great but I need to do more than that. I inspected the MBED Web tab section
"Handbook" which contains MBED's official "sanctioned" libraries. Next up, RTOS library for the Freedom.
I imported their "thread" example and tried to compile and a slew of errors showed up.
These compiler errors have to be a mistake :confused: ... The Freescale Freedom KL25Z is being showcased by MBED!
Maybe the RTOS was made for MBED's other two microcontrollers but not the KL25Z?
In any case, MBED's RTOS is needed for proper operation of MBED's numerous other networking libraries.!
This hiccup kills any application I needed to use for the Freescale Freedom. Maybe in a year or so it
would be ready for prime time! Software that works is the key and Paul S is "superman"

Score: PJRC 1 MBED 0 :D

t3andy
03-23-2013, 09:58 AM
Customer Support

There is an MBED map that shows all the developers in the world. Very impressive.
http://mbed.org/map/

Just maybe I could get an answer to my simple question on MBED's showcase KL25z Freescale Freedom?
I figure by asking a very simple question it would be answered quickly?

My simple yes/no question to the MBED users, owners and "many" developers is this ...


"Does (MBED) RTOS works on the Freescale Freedom KL25Z?" Posted 3/22/13

This question appears 3 places on MBED's Website and there was no response for 2 days and
so far the only response was an user who also needed to know the answer to the same question!

http://mbed.org/handbook/mbed-FRDM-KL25Z-Examples
http://mbed.org/questions/
http://mbed.org/forum/mbed/topic/4345/

On this forum board most simple Teensy 3 questions are answered in a timely fashion.
Unless Paul "S" came in contact with "Kryptonite", most (easy) questions are answered.
Heck, even the "spammers" will answer my questions on this forum board!

Customer Support
Score: PJRC 2 MBED 0 :D


Update ... I got a response


It appears that support isn't quite there yet. A few things I notice: <---------<<<< Imagine that ... vaporware

In mbed-rtos:

RTX_Conf_CM.c -- Needs to be updated to define OS_TASKCNT, OS_CLOCK, and OS_SCHEDULERSTKSIZE for the KL25Z
RTX_CM_lib.h -- Needs to be updated to define INITIAL_SP for the KL25Z
rt_CMSIS.c -- Needs to be updated to support Cortex M0+ (not just Cortex M0) and include "core_cm0plus.h"
The rtx directory has target specific sub-directories too, maybe something needs to be added there for the KL25Z
In mbed:

KL25Z library needs to be compiled with a define for the Coretex M0+ (not Cortex M0)
Not really related to the RTOS, but uARM isn't there for the KL25Z yet


update ...

It is truly amazing, that after 4 days posting a very simple question on The MBED's "forum board", that it has not been answered. We believe the reason why it hasn't been answered is this ... If someone paid, let us say, $150 for concert tickets, and your sitting next to a couple at a concert and you found out that they only paid $50 then we beleive you would be very distraught.

So, if you paid Tiffany's prices for a $64 MBED microcontroller and the same vendor (MBED) turns around and sells a Freescale Freedom clone for $13 you would also feel betrayed and distraught. Seeing any question about the Freescale Freedom LP25Z clone on the forum board will not put you in any good mood to answer any questions for a newbee for this cheaper MBED clone. Fortunately, for MBED users, MBED went one step further by bringing to market a cripple MBED clone. Fortunately, for us, we did not waste a lot of money ($13) bench testing it.

BTW ... Does anyone want to buy a Freescale Freedom LP25Z board with a custom made enclosure?

If not, it will go on our junk micro collector's shelf gathering dust along with The STM ARM "Maple", Parallax Basic Stamp(s), Parallax Propeller, Open Picus WiFi, Olmiex PIC Duinomite-Mega, MMBasic PIC32 MaxiMite, "Open" Pinguino, SolderCore, MSP430 LaunchPad, JeeLab's AVR JeeNode, Chipkit PIC Uno32, Basic Micro Atom24, GHI ARM FEZ Panda & Domino, Parallax Javelin Stamp, Parallax SX Microcontroller, STM ARM XDuino and ET-ARM Stamp.

t3andy
03-23-2013, 01:48 PM
Value for the money or "bang for the buck"

MBED's first microcontroller ARM Stamp NXP LPC1768 M3 sells at Tiffany's prices at $64 ($USD) (Digikey)
Now they reduced their Tiffany price down to $49 ($USD) The ARM competition must is heating up?

MBED then decided, out of desperation or fierce competition, to produce a "lower cost" MO low power version NXP LPC11U4 and the price is $59 ($USD) (Digikey)

MBED then decided to "low ball" everyone by introducing the at cost or loss leader or "bait and switch" Freescale Freedom at $13 ($USD)
In my opinion (above), its a crippled software ARM board that needs more development.

Now days, you can buy a 32 bit Arduino Due board for $50 ($USD) BUT ...
for $19 ($USD) from www.PJRC.com you can obtain a 32 bit ARM Stamp, Arduino software compatible, Teensy 3 with software that works!



Value for the money
Score: PJRC 3 MBED 0
And the hands down, clear cut winner by 10 lengths is ... www.PJRC.com :cool:

chrylis
06-25-2013, 07:08 AM
I want to thank all of you who have contributed your opinions and experiences on the various options, especially now that the FRDM-K20D50M is available. The Freedom board with the same MCU as the Teensy 3 costs the same but has lots of neat peripheral hardware included (touch sensor, accelerometer, etc.) that would be fun to play with, but the 1980's environment for most ARM dev tools makes me cringe. I've been using Linux exclusively as my computing and dev platform since 2000, and I certainly don't have $5k to spend on an IDE that's basically Eclipse CDT with ARM gcc and a few chip databases! I'm not the biggest fan of the Arduino IDE for anything especially complicated, but control of my dev tools is an absolute must-have, and being able to build T3 programs in it gives me that assurance; I'm placing an order for a T3 tonight!

Does anyone have any experience using Eclipse or other development tools with the T3? The open-source embedded plugins for Eclipse seem to have died, and virtually everything I've done with it has been Java development, but it seems like it should be feasible to get a C++ build working.

stevech
06-25-2013, 07:46 AM
Eclipse. funny how you admire it. I had to use it on a prior project and I loathed it - because it diverted way too much of my time to the tool, not the app. I just don't have the time or contract funding to make career investment in Eclipse learning. No money, no time. But that's just opinion. I have used IAR for years doing ARM7 work. It was fast to learn. Like it should be. IAR knows their tool has to be intuitive or people won't pay for it.

There are two threads here on attempts at a T3 plugin for Eclipse. I tried the short one. Wasted an evening on that. The other one here had like 100 steps to follow. Valiant effort but shouldn't be needed.

I'd like to see emIDE or emBlocks (with GCC/G++) adapted for the T3. I gave it several evenings' work. But failed - likely because there's no K20 template to use for CPU setup. I tried to adapt one from the K40 and I'm too much a novice to change that which assumes 8MHz and no PLL, different divider settings, etc. I'm very close but ran out of patience. These do have the issue that there's no equivalent to a makefile's two command lines, one for C and one for C++. Other than having a command line per C++ to override C, I don't see an easy way 'round this, but I'm not the x-spurt.

The FRDM-KL25Z examples seem to be hard-coded for CodeWarrior which is to be avoided.

chrylis
06-25-2013, 11:21 AM
As I mentioned, I use Eclipse for Java development, which is about as far away from MCU programming as you can get! In that case, the learning curve is hugely repaid in keeping plates in the air, but for a relatively simple embedded project, most of what I'd like is library management, build management, and autocompletion. Arduino does library and simple build just fine, but it seems to get out of control in a hurry if you're building a complex program. emIDE looks promising, but for some reason they've made it Windows-only, even though Code::Blocks is cross-platform.

It'll be very interesting to see whether CMSIS delivers on what ARM is hoping. They clearly recognize that the wildly disparate configurations of ARM chips are a headache for developers and toolmakers, but it seems that that's a feature, not a bug, for tool vendors.

PaulStoffregen
06-25-2013, 12:50 PM
Arduino does library and simple build just fine, but it seems to get out of control in a hurry if you're building a complex program.

Can you give me an example?

chrylis
06-28-2013, 11:00 AM
Can you give me an example?

The IDE editor component doesn't cleanly handle multiple files. It doesn't have autocompletion or tooltip hints, its syntax highlighting is a per-line macro instead of context-sensitive (try failing to close a quoted string), and it doesn't do code folding or keyword linking (clicking on a function name to go to its definition or prototype).

stevech
06-28-2013, 08:15 PM
The IDE editor component doesn't cleanly handle multiple files. It doesn't have autocompletion or tooltip hints, its syntax highlighting is a per-line macro instead of context-sensitive (try failing to close a quoted string), and it doesn't do code folding or keyword linking (clicking on a function name to go to its definition or prototype).
Keyword linking is my big loss, being accustomed to such in other tools.
I'd even go with (bloated) Eclipse if it were tested and took no more than a half-hour to get running. As is, it is a term project for Arduino.

Here's an example of the lack of modular programming with the Arduino IDE - I guess because code in all "tabs" is concatenated into a single compilation file.
Tab 1 and tab 2 in the IDE declare a static variable with the same name, e.g., "static char buffer[1]"

Derangedgamer123
07-08-2013, 05:06 PM
I would love to see a clear path that explains programming in C with the Teensy. If that video where to be made or if that online tutorial where to be made for those that might not have every programmed in C and have only really used some IDE like arduino this would be a blessing. I for one love the NewbieHack tutorials on AVR. And this is FAR FROM a damming statement too teensy 3.0 its freaking AMAZING I love this tool and I feel bad to ask for support to make the progress of what this team has developed I am just interested in using the raw dev board that the Teensy is on with just C language compiled into a HEX format that is loaded with teensyuploading tool.

PaulStoffregen
07-08-2013, 07:40 PM
I would love to see a clear path that explains programming in C with the Teensy.

I'm planning to do something like this. It's a much lower priority than a number of other things (fixing the Mac bug is at the top of my list right now).

Long-term, I'm going to reorganize the Teensy2 stuff in the same scheme as Teensy3 uses, and then create 2 sets of downloads from the same files, one for Arduino and one for C/C++ usage.

Derangedgamer123
07-08-2013, 08:32 PM
That would enable a classroom to learn embedded systems C programming with your product. I would be so great full but in all honestly I am great full for what has been developed thus far!

PaulStoffregen
07-08-2013, 08:34 PM
You do realize that Arduino is really just C++ with some simpler libraries, right? It even supports using an external editor.

Then again, the feature-poor IDE and colors scream "hobbyist" which I guess doesn't sound like "embedded systems"?

Derangedgamer123
07-08-2013, 08:49 PM
If I where to go into industry I wouldn't imagine that I would be dealing with Nicely Built Library's and IDE's that are as simple on the eyes.... The winavr feel seems like the tract that would be something that would be taught in an Embedded Systems course. I might just be way off here but there is a HUGE difference from the VHDL programming courses I had take using xilinx and the weak presence of C programming tough in our department.

You see weird end design projects of FPGA's that are what would be used in industry next to arduino projects.... I must be crazy but if I was an employer I would think that's a cool toy and only because of the IDE used. (That and the super extensive library utilized to achieve their design).

In other words I need to learn this makefile business and see if there is a way to compile code in a C compiler to use the teensyduino to load the .hex.... (Please correct me if im wrong)

I will leave on this note Paul you are a freaking rockstar in my eyes thank you for all you do!

PaulStoffregen
07-08-2013, 10:50 PM
In other words I need to learn this makefile business and see if there is a way to compile code in a C compiler to use the teensyduino to load the .hex.... (Please correct me if im wrong)


Teensy3 actually has this now. But it's inside the Arduino directory after you run the Teensyduino installer. Just look for the makefile in hardware/teensy/cores/teensy3. It has comments to help you get started, and to help you deleted the rest of Arduino if you only want to build from the makefile.

Eventually there will be 2 versions to download... the Teensyduino installer and a smaller download with just the makefile and other stuff it requires, but not anything "Arduino".

stevech
07-09-2013, 02:17 AM
Makefiles - I'd recommend not going that route. With today's nice IDEs such as Eclipse for Arduino too, one can avoid the brain-braking obtuse syntax of Makefiles. Concentrate on the project organization. I used makefiles decades ago - before there were nice IDEs with good tools. Good IDEs essentially generate a make file - because they know when you add/remove C/C++ files and .h files, and they keep track of which source files need to be recompiled because they are younger than the last time their corresponding object (.o) file was updated. It's automated with a good IDE, whereas with makefiles you have to follow that syntax (ouch) in the makefiles and edit the make file as you add/remove/rename .c, .cpp, .h and other files. The main thing I get from an IDE is an instantaneous jump around the modules as you look at an existing piece of code, then jump back to where you were. And pop-up tips on the params for a function you are about to use. Right-click on a symbol and you can do: where is it defined? Where all is it used? What type is it? Where is the type definition? And so much more.

AverageGuy
08-14-2013, 09:20 AM
I
btw: show me any other $19 product where you get the level of FREE support and dedication you get with T3. I have certainly never seen anything like it.

That's why, even though I don't have a need for one yet, I ordered a T3 yesterday. Be sure to support they guy who supports you!

Jim.

Derangedgamer123
08-14-2013, 01:33 PM
Teensy3 actually has this now. But it's inside the Arduino directory after you run the Teensyduino installer. Just look for the makefile in hardware/teensy/cores/teensy3. It has comments to help you get started, and to help you deleted the rest of Arduino if you only want to build from the makefile.

Eventually there will be 2 versions to download... the Teensyduino installer and a smaller download with just the makefile and other stuff it requires, but not anything "Arduino".

This is awesome Paul I just want to say that this is an amazing platform and that beyond that the support is just amazing!!!
-- Anything that I'm asking for is just me being needed as you have literally everything (mostly) of what people would want.....
I guess I would just love to see a small tutorial of someone using this NON-ARDUINO path and do some basic code like a hello world "blink" and perhaps access some of the (what do you say) "special registers" so those of us that grew up with Arduino and haven't gotten a chance to see the real language underneath the hood have a chance at accessing this. This type of documentation could also pave the way for a book to be created on embedded c for a classroom environment :-)

dbridges
08-14-2013, 09:39 PM
This is awesome Paul I just want to say that this is an amazing platform and that beyond that the support is just amazing!!!
-- Anything that I'm asking for is just me being needed as you have literally everything (mostly) of what people would want.....
I guess I would just love to see a small tutorial of someone using this NON-ARDUINO path and do some basic code like a hello world "blink" and perhaps access some of the (what do you say) "special registers" so those of us that grew up with Arduino and haven't gotten a chance to see the real language underneath the hood have a chance at accessing this. This type of documentation could also pave the way for a book to be created on embedded c for a classroom environment :-)

I second this. I'm finding the ARM world quite a bit harder to get started in than the AVR world in terms of programming without the Arduino ecosystem.

chrylis
08-14-2013, 10:49 PM
I second this. I'm finding the ARM world quite a bit harder to get started in than the AVR world in terms of programming without the Arduino ecosystem.

Hear, hear! It's clearly possible to use the regular toolchain to compile for ARM, since Arduino does it, but I have no idea where to start. The AVR plugin for Eclipse handles the AVR-specific tasks like building images, and I'm thoroughly stumped with where to start for ARM.

PaulStoffregen
08-14-2013, 11:06 PM
Maybe Jantee's Eclipse plugin? Or the sample makefile in hardware/teensy/cores/teensy3 if you can work on the command line with make?