STM32 M0 board with BLE $25
stevech Tue Mar 08, 2016 6:48 pm
Replies
RogerClark Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:24 pm
Small but expensive and lacks the 32khz crystal that allows it to operate in its very low power modes.
Waveshare do some slightly bigger but which has the 32khz crystal, and is a quarter of the price.
mrburnette Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:35 pm
stevech wrote:https://www.tindie.com/products/OSHChip … 4d7f5b322f
RogerClark Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:49 pm
Ray
Those CC2540 based modules are very limited in what you can do.
The “HM10” has more features than the one you linked to, but all of them are a pain to use, as they are controlled via Serial.
The only way to write code for the CC254x modules is using the IAR 8051 compiler, which is $$$$$$ ( because TI only release their BLE lib binaries in IAR format)
Actually, I am looking at developing for the CC254x devices at the moment, but the compiler price is a big problem, and although I downloaded the 30 day demo of IAR, I have not activated it, because Im too busy on other projects to have time to make full use of the 30 days in which to determine if its cost effective to buy the compiler.
Note. Just to be factually correct, I heard that if you approach TI and sign an NDA it may be possible to get the source for the BLE libs so that they could be compiled using an open source 8051 compiler, but I don’t think this is a commercially viable option as there isnt GCC for 8051 and you would be reliant on an old unsupported compiler.
mrburnette Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:55 pm
RogerClark wrote:Ray
Those CC2540 based modules are very limited in what you can do.
<…>
RogerClark Wed Mar 09, 2016 12:25 am
Its not the CC254x thats the problem, its the preflashed firmware, which is often poor quality with limited functionality
The CC254x its self is a very good chip, especially considering its using an 8051 as its core.
The key selling point for those type of modules is the price, as they are cheaper and more readily available than nRF51822 based modules.
mrburnette Wed Mar 09, 2016 12:34 am
Ah, ha. I’m not familiar with Bluetooth for comms on uC. But, it would seem that “buyer beware” is appropriate.
Ray
Rintin Wed Mar 09, 2016 8:31 am
RogerClark wrote:as there isnt GCC for 8051
Slammer Wed Mar 09, 2016 12:02 pm
SDCC for 8051 is working very well, not very effective like KEIL, but acceptable.
I was using SDCC some years ago for many projects.
I was using SDCC some years ago for many projects.
stevech Wed Mar 09, 2016 5:35 pm
mrburnette wrote:RogerClark wrote:Ray
Those CC2540 based modules are very limited in what you can do.
<…>
RogerClark Wed Mar 09, 2016 8:29 pm
I read the Hackaday thread on the OSHChip module, and watched some of the youtube video.
But the video was painful to watch,because IMHO the module creator / vendor , spoke about the nRF51822 as if he’d invented the nordic’s chip himself.
Its just one of many nRF51822 modules. Its only distinctive feature is that the module footprint is a DIL IC.
martinayotte Wed Mar 09, 2016 10:35 pm
Still this guys seems to have a huge CV and several patents according to his LinkedIn page … 
RogerClark Wed Mar 09, 2016 10:49 pm
No doubting the effort he put in to making that product.
I just doubt it was worth the effort, purely in terms of return on investment of the product its self.
I has however got his business a lot of publicity, so if you factor that cost, then it could be time well spent, even if the product doesn’t sell in huge volumes
stevech Thu Mar 10, 2016 3:11 am
martinayotte wrote:Still this guys seems to have a huge CV and several patents according to his LinkedIn page …
RogerClark Thu Mar 10, 2016 3:17 am
I think this guy is the company….
Anyway. Patents are only valid in small countries, not big ones like China
mrburnette Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:51 pm
RogerClark wrote:
<…>
Patents are only valid in small countries, not big ones like China
<…>
Patents are only valid in small countries, not big ones like China
martinayotte Thu Mar 10, 2016 2:30 pm
mrburnette wrote:
OMG! I spewed my coffee over that remark!
OMG! I spewed my coffee over that remark!
mrburnette Thu Mar 10, 2016 4:15 pm
martinayotte wrote:mrburnette wrote:
OMG! I spewed my coffee over that remark!
OMG! I spewed my coffee over that remark!
RogerClark Thu Mar 10, 2016 8:57 pm
Hi Ray,
I’m glad you spotted the humour that was intentional in my statement, as I realise in hindsight that it could be taken in the wrong way.
But I think there is a general consensus that the patent system no longer doing what it was intended do.
stevech Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:43 am
Patent office (US) is FUBAR.
They just issue them and let the patent troll’s lawyers duke it out for who’s got the most money to waste in court. But then, much lawyer income goes to pay the country club dues and bar tabs. At over drinks, they collude on how to drag out the case since they know how much $ the litigants have.
Or is this too cynical?
ahull Sat Mar 12, 2016 12:36 pm
stevech wrote:Patent office (US) is FUBAR.
They just issue them and let the patent troll’s lawyers duke it out for who’s got the most money to waste in court. But then, much lawyer income goes to pay the country club dues and bar tabs. At over drinks, they collude on how to drag out the case since they know how much $ the litigants have.
Or is this too cynical?