The engineers that grew up on vacuum tubes and transitioned to transistors looked at uA741 op Amps and said, those are useless now and, no matter how much they improve, they always will be.

Though I fairly burn with shame (well... not quite) -- honesty compels my confession that I too find the 741 to be a waste of space -- My sentiments upon the subject being 'from the opposite direction', as it were

But to your point (as I apprehend it?) -- I aver that Arduino and its ilk do not represent progress - nor my rejection of same 'unwillingness to advance' (please note that I have no objection whatever to 'bare' uCs) - but, rather, are part and parcel of a pervasive, burgeoning, 'dumb down culture' - I feel the practice of training rising generations in the use of 'crutches' as well as figuratively chewing digesting their food for them (with corollary legitimization of mental indolence, blind acquiescence to 'trends' and instillation of the mind-killing complacency that rejoices under the euphemism 'normalcy bias') must, and indeed, is, producing catastrophic results... @Aleph(0) As a 'material witness' to the institutionalized enfeeblement of your generation in this regard -- perhaps you'd like to comment here?

With sincere respect
HP

 

Though I fairly burn with shame (well... not quite) -- honesty compels my confession that I too find the 741 to be a waste of space -- My sentiments upon the subject being 'from the opposite direction', as it were

But to your point (as I apprehend it?) -- I aver that Arduino and its ilk do not represent progress - nor my rejection of same 'unwillingness to advance' (please note that I have no objection whatever to 'bare' uCs) - but, rather, are part and parcel of a pervasive, burgeoning, 'dumb down culture' - I feel the practice of training rising generations in the use of 'crutches' as well as figuratively chewing digesting their food for them (with corollary legitimization of mental indolence, blind acquiescence to 'trends' and instillation of the mind-killing complacency that rejoices under the euphemism 'normalcy bias') must, and indeed, is, producing catastrophic results... @Aleph(0) As a 'material witness' to the institutionalized enfeeblement of your generation in this regard -- perhaps you'd like to comment here?

With sincere respect
HP

I've seen what mechanical engineers with no electronics training (other than YouTube videos) can do with an arduino in their prototype. A prototype used to win IEEE micromouse competition. The winning team had, in fact, no EEs on the team and no rules were broken because every team was encouraged by IEEE to use the latest technology - and not compete with one arm tied behind their backs by trying to be "purists". Note, the team if only programmers and mechanical engineers had a bot that was smaller, faster and smarter than all other bots.

I view arduino as an enabler and si ply one more level of engineering abstraction that can be used when assembling a block diagram for a solution. You seem to forget the difference between engineers and scientists.
- Scientists try to understand the world around them, while,
- engineers solve problems based on known science - usually with two or more of the following constraints (quicky, inexpensively, reliably, ...).

Too bad for the engineer or scientist who views an arduino as the be-all/end-all solution to electronics but it is certainly an excellent solution for cost and speed when a quantity one final unit is required - an engineer should be able to find resources to redesign using discrete microcontrollers if quantity of the end application would justify such a solution. Being an arduino snob (Microcontroller elitist?) can slow developmemt and add cost - why would you want that? It's like asking a roofer to replace your shingles and requiring him to use hammer and a nails instead of modern nail guns (I said, "modern", not the crappy ones from the early 1980s).

 

You seem to forget the difference between engineers and scientists.

FWIW I was a scientist long before I was anything like an engineer -- That said, I find the latter discipline to be more challenging/engaging...

The winning team had, in fact, no EEs on the team and no rules were broken because every team was encouraged by IEEE to use the latest technology - and not compete with one arm tied behind their backs by trying to be "purists". Note, the team if only programmers and mechanical engineers had a bot that was smaller, faster and smarter than all other bots.

That toy-builders benefit from relief of 'excessive' creative thought via recourse to prefabricated toys is hardly surprising! Shame on IEEE for (the described) encouragement of "scavenger hunt-esk" intellectual sloth! -- How truly the mighty have fallen!

Being an arduino snob (Microcontroller elitist?) can slow developmemt and add cost- why would you want that?

Because I appreciate the distinction between proficiency via comprehension and application -vs- what passes for adequacy via recourse to crutches...

It's like asking a roofer to replace your shingles and requiring him to use hammer and a nails instead of modern nail guns

And I would argue that it's rather more analogous to requiring a worker to use proper tools (uCs) -- as opposed to a Swiss army knife (Arduino) received as a premium in exchange for $25 and five 'box tops'...

but it is certainly an excellent solution for cost and speed when a quantity one final unit is required

Agreed! - I'll grant that the 'tinker toy'/'erector set' approach (CIP Arduino and its ilk) isn't entirely without merit - especially in assembly of research apparatus and, of course, the hobby/interactive arts 'arena' (the latter of which, you may recall, was said platform's original intent) -- That said, I view 'introduction' of same to any but basal 'technical'/scientific courses as dubious on to reckless! --- I hold that the 'rising generations' are no more inherently 'lazy' nor 'emotionally frail' than their predecessors --- It is we (i.e. their 'elders') who set the standard -- as I see it, Arduino - while a potentially useful tool, is being co-opted as a means of lowering said standard...

Very best regards
HP

 

as I see it, Arduino - while a potentially useful tool, is being co-opted as a means of lowering said standard

Again, two perspectives. You say "lowering said standard", I say, "lowering said hurtles or barriers to entry".

 

Again, two perspectives. You say "lowering said standard", I say, "lowering said hurtles or barriers to entry".

Agreed. This is like when the assembler zealots say you need to be able to program in assembler to understand what is going on in the chip. I say why should I care? I want to be able to get on with my project, not get bogged down in details of how every bit and bit works. Why don't all software developers write every program from machine language? Or hardware engineers design every circuit from discreet components? Or better from the silicon? The benefit would be they would have a real benefit from knowing exactly how their design is working down to the smallest detail. The reality is their project would never reach fruition.

If I can use an Arduino to get my project launched quickly then why not use one? It is a hell of a lot better than not getting the project completed at all.

 

I say why should I care?

Because I can do things in software driven hardware that you can't even dream about.

 

Because I can do things in software driven hardware that you can't even dream about.

And why would he want to dream about what you do. He has his own experiences to enjoy.

 

And why would he want to dream about what you do. He has his own experiences to enjoy.

As well as those that only want to use an Arduino. Personally I prefer the pic. In my opinion, more flexible without the bulk and cost of the Arduino. But if it gets the job done for some folks then wonderful.

 

Alright then -- Inasmuch as actual components seem to be 'fair game' after all -- My choice is the 6502 CPU - A fail in every respect by comparison to the Z80 (up to and including necessarily memory mapped IO space, a tediously small instruction set {sans the advantages of 'RISC'} and IMO, most appallingly, implementation of registers via on-chip dynamic ram) ---- Said devices being, for the benefit of 'millennials' and 'centennials', 8-Bit CPUs
Heresy, pure heresy.

Best regards
HP

Sincere thanks for that! --You've solved the mystery of the 6502's existence - and, indeed, use in many early microcomputer products (e.g. Ohio Scientific, Apple II, Commodore, etc...) -- Even so, the additional $175 ($800 adjusted for inflation) piece price would seem little enough to pay for conscientious, forward looking design...

Inasmuch as '75 was the year of my nativity - the 'zeitgeist' somehow escaped me - Even so, I don't want to believe electronics enthusiasts and 'tech consumers' of the day were that tightfisted?

Best regards
HP

Yes! We really were that tight fisted.

 

I've been looking for that DATASHEET for a long time.

So, how many of them do you have in stock? How much would you want for them?

 

Though I fairly burn with shame (well... not quite) -- honesty compels my confession that I too find the 741 to be a waste of space -- My sentiments upon the subject being 'from the opposite direction', as it were

But to your point (as I apprehend it?) -- I aver that Arduino and its ilk do not represent progress - nor my rejection of same 'unwillingness to advance' (please note that I have no objection whatever to 'bare' uCs) - but, rather, are part and parcel of a pervasive, burgeoning, 'dumb down culture' - I feel the practice of training rising generations in the use of 'crutches' as well as figuratively chewing digesting their food for them (with corollary legitimization of mental indolence, blind acquiescence to 'trends' and instillation of the mind-killing complacency that rejoices under the euphemism 'normalcy bias') must, and indeed, is, producing catastrophic results... @Aleph(0) As a 'material witness' to the institutionalized enfeeblement of your generation in this regard -- perhaps you'd like to comment here?

With sincere respect
HP

Thats sort of how I see it as well. I have no problem with putting sophisticated control on a design if it warrants it but unfortunately as most of us die hard analog systems guys see here on the forums is too many believe that if they just throw enough control and code at something they can force a system to work the way they want rather than design the system to work as it should.

Why design a properly matched and tuned LC tank filter to get a certain waveform out when you can throw enough coding and a high enough frequency PWM generated signal at it to force a poorly designed and matched LC circuit to work (unreliably) instead?
Or, why buy a 10 cent self blinking LED that is made to blink at 1 Hz when you can build a uC based circuit to blink the LED at 1 HZ?

 

Thats sort of how I see it as well. I have no problem with putting sophisticated control on a design if it warrants it but unfortunately as most of us die hard analog systems guys see here on the forums is too many believe that if they just throw enough control and code at something they can force a system to work the way they want rather than design the system to work as it should.

Why design a properly matched and tuned LC tank filter to get a certain waveform out when you can throw enough coding and a high enough frequency PWM generated signal at it to force a poorly designed and matched LC circuit to work (unreliably) instead?
Or, why buy a 10 cent self blinking LED that is made to blink at 1 Hz when you can build a uC based circuit to blink the LED at 1 HZ?

Where does this thinking come from that code is "thrown" at a problem? Why is all code inferior for some reason? You seem to trust code to get all your posts up on this board and countless other things that happen in your life each day but you still think it is all crap? Please explain.

 

While I agree the uA741 is useless for most purposes, in the training environment should be self evident since those being introduced to the parameters are typically neophytes with little, if any, experience operating the test equipment they will be using. The uA741 as a training aid is it's useful purpose.

Unfortunately, as the student progresses, they tend to exploit what they know and not others that are more suitable. Another thing to consider is the schools inventory and the potential pitfalls of their stock.

If the demand disappears, so will the device. Till then, someone will continue manufacturing the uA741.

Anyway, that is my opine.

 

While I agree the uA741 is useless for most purposes, in the training environment should be self evident since those being introduced to the parameters are typically neophytes with little, if any, experience operating the test equipment they will be using. The uA741 as a training aid is it's useful purpose.

Unfortunately, as the student progresses, they tend to exploit what they know and not others that are more suitable. Another thing to consider is the schools inventory and the potential pitfalls of their stock.

If the demand disappears, so will the device. Till then, someone will continue manufacturing the uA741.

Anyway, that is my opine.

As usual, the point was missed - did you see it fly by?
I was clear in the comment that the 741, no matter what anyone thought of it, was an early step in a paradigm shift. So too is the arduino.

 

The engineers that grew up on vacuum tubes and transitioned to transistors looked at uA741 op Amps and said, those are useless now and, no matter how much they improve, they always will be.

As one who "grew up" with vacuum tubes, transitioned to transistors, and saw the MTBF benefits of the move to solid state and the RIF of technicians to maintain systems, I retain the opine that "for the reasons most engineers hate the uA741, is the reason schools love it." With an abundance of training material, the educational institutions don't have to invest a lot of effort in creating new training material.

 

Where does this thinking come from that code is "thrown" at a problem? Why is all code inferior for some reason? You seem to trust code to get all your posts up on this board and countless other things that happen in your life each day but you still think it is all crap? Please explain.

Literacy and general reading comprehension (sentence details) ain't your thing is it?

Re read what you quoted from me a few times and if you still don't get it ask HP to go over it with you.

 

Again, two perspectives. You say "lowering said standard", I say, "lowering said hurtles or barriers to entry".

I say why should I care? I want to be able to get on with my project, not get bogged down in details of how every bit and bit works.

I'm sensitive to your arguments to the extent that use of said platforms makes perfect sense where same is peripheral to the aspect of a project under development - i.e. as a temporary 'friendly PLC' tasked with non-time-critical function{s} pending focus upon proper design of said area{s}...

Moreover, I recognize definite (albeit limited) educational value in use of such platforms as 'malleable support infrastructure' applied to instruction in 'advanced topics' where distraction of focus by consideration of 'glueware' is undesirable...

Point being: Where appropriate, the Arduino is, at best, a tool (à la an adjustable clamp 'standing in' for an appropriate fastener) during evaluation of technique...

"Designing with Arduino' and Arduino 'cookbookery', on the other hand, represent particularly egregious examples of 'teaching down' to students - and, sadly, burdening same with some rather crippling, hard to shake, habits in the bargain!

This is like when the assembler zealots say you need to be able to program in assembler to understand what is going on in the chip. I say why should I care?

'Machine-level' coding is essential where physical-level interfacing is at issue (e.g. most uC applications) -- Otherwise (IMO) it's a matter of preference -- especially as memory/CPU 'economy' are no longer primary considerations...

Where does this thinking come from that code is "thrown" at a problem?

Digital implementation/representation of (necessarily) analog paradigms is tantamount to 'virtualization' of reality (at the physical and, indeed, metaphysical 'levels') -- As with all constructs it works fine - until it doesn't! -- Then it's 'Cinderella Time' -- And nary a 'safe space' in evidence --- Indeed! Code has its place - and a vital one at that! - albeit far from the illusory 'panacea' of 'fan boys/girls' phronemophobic desperation!

Best regards
HP

Disclaimer -- I am unaware of the presence of any 'fan people' on this site!

 

Hello,

Who says that noting can be done with a RaspberryPi?
Here is a link to the MagPi magazine:
https://www.raspberrypi.org/magpi/issues/

You will also find some specials and project books over there.

Bertus

 

Who says that noting can be done with a RaspberryPi?

I don't think anyone is saying nothing can be done with them but rather just the opposite as in too many people throw them and whatever code they can come up with at simple issues where basic understandings of analog circuit function or for simple logic work that one or two basic and cheap IC's could easily and simply handle.

How many threads does this site have now that relate to someone wanting to do some function that a simple analog IC or simple circuit could do like basic PWM work but they feel a arduino or such and a pile of code is the way to go instead because they can't fathom that a 555 or a 3524 or 494 or 324 Op Amp IC or such could do everything they want and more with far less components, time and cost involved and be more compatible, robust and reliable in actual implementation as well?

 

I don't think anyone is saying nothing can be done with them but rather just the opposite as in too many people throw them and whatever code they can come up with at simple issues where basic understandings of analog circuit function or for simple logic work that one or two basic and cheap IC's could easily and simply handle.

How many threads does this site have now that relate to someone wanting to do some function that a simple analog IC or simple circuit could do like basic PWM work but they feel a arduino or such and a pile of code is the way to go instead because they can't fathom that a 555 or a 3524 or 494 or 324 Op Amp IC or such could do everything they want and more with far less components, time and cost involved and be more compatible, robust and reliable in actual implementation as well?

and how many threads on this site where someone wants a one-time project and we start teaching them how to make PCBs when all they needed was the connections already afforded them on a $12 Arduino board. Oh, and they get an Arduino - they only have a few lines of code to write and it is done. Problem solved.

If we take your route to the solution, we end up 50 posts into the conversation with a discussion where the toner-transfer method is not working for them... Oh god!