I’m convinced that we should have an option for using standalone boot loader with which you can upload images. These are valid use cases.
We should make that happen. > On Jun 8, 2016, at 11:41 AM, Kevin Townsend <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why not both? I don't see Mynewt having massive appeal to the larger Maker > community since the community is very focused on Arduino for a number of > valid reasons, but it will appeal to a certain type of person in that > extremely diverse community. It's the right tool for some jobs and not for > others. It won't replace Arduino and I don't think that is anyone's goal. > > Coming from the maker community myself, I appreciate the production focus on > Mynewt which isn't present in Arduino. Many of the design decisions that went > into the platform are clearly based on real world experience shipping and > maintaining devices, such as version control and unit tests and simulation. I > don't think your average Arduino user is the target here (feel free to > correct me, and I'm only thinking out loud expressing my own perceptions), > but more for the 0.1-1% of people who want to move up to something they can > maintain and produce or sell. > > I'm approaching Mynewt primarily as a potential user and product designer > attracted by a fully open source BLE stack, but I'm also interested to see if > some of the more adventurous or curious customers take the bait and dig into > it themselves. Mynewt allows me to design products that are fully open, which > gives people in the maker community options they might not have with > proprietary code from the various silicon vendors. > > I'm trying to make a case for Serial for both sides of the equation, though. > I can integrate USB CDC from free (with an MCU that has a USB PHY on board > such as the SAMD21) to under $1 with a dedicated USB/Serial converter (which > would be necessary with the nRF5x chips with no on chip USB). Free to under > $1 de-bricking and flashing is very compelling for a significant reliability > boost, even on cost sensitive devices, and worth the extra 2-3KB flash. I see > this solving real world production issues since you are less likely to have > bricked devices. A nice side effect, though, is that the cheap to manufacture > HW also becomes more maker friendly just in case people do want to poke at it > themselves! It seems win win to me, and can solves problems for both camps. > > > On 08/06/16 20:17, David Moshal wrote: >> Thanks Wayne, that's very interesting, I think it helps explain the >> disconnect here. >> >> I understood David Simmons to be suggesting that Makers (like me) are >> the target end-users, >> i.e: that MyNewt would be an alternative to, say, Arduino (and why not). >> >> However, in your use-case, you are the end-user of MyNext, and Makers >> are your end-users, no? >> i.e: a layer lower in the stack. So, in that case MyNewt would be >> positioned as an alternative to an RTOS (or no RTOS) for embedded C >> programmers building devices for Makers. >> >> So, if I may, I'd suggest that we step back and ask Sterling who >> exactly he envisages as the end user of this project: >> Makers, or embedded C developers building devices for Makers? >> >> David >> >> >
