Is it Cheating to use an Arduino?

[daybyter]

I think reusing libs is smart, because the more people a lib use, the more likely it is to find any bugs in this lib. So with arduino libs, your chances are quite good to get a bug-free lib.

[kolbep]

Well, the 1st Arduino arrived today.
I have already popped some of the Sketches (Blinking, Serial, Ethernet Server, Etc)
and love how the libraries make it so simple.

I have also ordered myself an Arduino Mega and Nano just to have a range (and some spare parts) all part of Banggoods 9/9 Special.

I am a bit busy doing my Electrical work during the day, and Editing a Wedding DVD in the evenings, so the arduino will just have to sit blinking on the desk until next week :-(

[daybyter]

Also check stm32duino.com and those cheap stm32f103 boards at ebay.

[zapta]

I have also ordered myself an Arduino Mega and Nano just to have a range (and some spare parts) all part of Banggoods 9/9 Special.

Where did you get the nano?

I am looking for a nano with a real ftdi chip.

[westfw]

I am looking for a nano with a real ftdi chip.

You might have to build one.
It's not clear that even the original Gravitech Nanos had "real" FTDIs.  :-(

[Xenon Photon]

PIC micros are great for learning, just make sure you select the one that can do the required task. And don't stick with the PIC16F877A that everyone use to either flash some LEDs or to build a computer gadget! PIC's have small ones to flash some LEDs (e.g PIC12F675) and there is also PICs to connect to your computer via USB and it have enough ROM for your code like PIC18F4550.

And as said before, If it is convenient to use a PIC then go for it, if not then use whatever is convenient.

Also the world is changing. Try to keep up with it. Those days you can find 32 bit ARM processors with a lot of amazing features. for example Zapta's ARM PRO MINI

[zapta]

I am looking for a nano with a real ftdi chip.

You might have to build one.
It's not clear that even the original Gravitech Nanos had "real" FTDIs.  :-(

I am looking at the Arduino Nano manual below. It says that U2 is an FT232RL. I am not familiar with the Nano (used Pro Mini so far, with FTDI Basic). Isn't it an official Arduino board?

https://www.arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/ArduinoNanoManual23.pdf

[Rick Law]

I am looking for a nano with a real ftdi chip.

You might have to build one.
It's not clear that even the original Gravitech Nanos had "real" FTDIs.  :-(

I suppose you can look at it as "at least it is an FTDI compatable chip" as oppose to a CH340. 

The CH340 works okay too but you do have to load another driver.  For WinXP, the CH340 cannot distinguish one from another whereas, each of my FT232RL device has an unique ID on the FTDI bus. (I have four FT232RL device only, they each have a different ID so I am assuming it is by design rather than luck of the draw for my four FT232RL.)

So, with my FT232RL based stuff, I can RegEDIT the registry for that ID so my "Arduino" (ATMEGA+FT232RL made to look like an UNO) for temperature log will always use com3, my INA219 volt/amp "Arduino" always use com5, my FTDI RS232 to USB gets com2, so on.  Regardless of order of plug in, my assigned com port for that FT232RL is always the same matching my corresponding PC data collection program specific to that application.  The edit is cumbersome since RegEDITing those entry cannot occur while Windows is running.  But once done, WinXP knows which of the four FT232RL I plug in and assign the "right" com correspondingly.

With my four CH340 based Nano, there is no unique ID associated with it.  I have 4 so they are com9, 10, 11, 12.   The first one plug in is always com9, regardless or which one of the four Nano I am plugging in.  So I have to juggle the com port either on my PC program or juggle the port assignment in the device manager.

Apart from that, the CH340g Nano works rather well.

[westfw]

Arduino Nano is (was?) an official arduino board, but AFAIK, it was always manufactured by Gravitech rather than by Smart Projects.  (I could be wrong.   I notice that both Arduino.cc and Arduino.org have the Nano in their current "product lists."  Who can tell for sure.
The official Nanos were always rather expensive, and a lot of people bought clones.  For some time, counterfeit FT232rl chips were on the market, and you had to be "careful" to get genuine chips.  I don't know if Gravitech was "careful."
In any case, when FTDI did their "disable counterfeit ft232 chips" driver hack, it was mostly people with Nanos that complained about bricked boards, and some of them claimed to have purchased their Nanos through official channels (Newark, Digikey, etc.)

Nano clones have appeared with other non-FTDI chips for their USB/Serial interface.  I'm sure I've seen "prolific" chips (also subject to counterfeiting) (http://www.ebay.com/itm/DK-NANO-V4-0-MINI-USB-ATMEGA328-5-V-16Mhz-MICRO-BRAND-NEW-ASSEMBLED-/251376044179?hash=item3a872e0893 ), and "cp2102" would be "likely."  Most of the modern crop of clones have a CH340g chip (which AFAIK has been relatively complaint-free, aside from "you have to install drivers from a source you really don't trust that much", and "it's not the chip I expected.")

[retrolefty]

I am looking for a nano with a real ftdi chip.

You might have to build one.
It's not clear that even the original Gravitech Nanos had "real" FTDIs.  :-(

I am looking at the Arduino Nano manual below. It says that U2 is an FT232RL. I am not familiar with the Nano (used Pro Mini so far, with FTDI Basic). Isn't it an official Arduino board?

https://www.arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/ArduinoNanoManual23.pdf

 That's a somewhat dated manual as it shows the Nano using a ATmega168 rather then the present ATmega328P. The original Nano was made under licence from Arduino by Gravitech for like $50 each.

 The present version V3 Nano is an unlicensed Asian clone of the original Nano. I just received my first "CH340 based Nano'" yesterday. It seems to work fine on my windows 10 laptop with no effort on my part to find or load a CH340 USB driver, windows found it by itself as I had been told it would.

 At $2.69 each with free shipping I may have to order a dozen.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/141694439617?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

[westfw]

The present version V3 Nano is an unlicensed Asian clone of the original Nano.

There was an official V3.0 Nano as well; an upgrade to a m328: https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardNano
And a version 3.2 from other other Arduino: http://www.arduino.org/products/arduino-nano
plus, there are several different versions of the CH340G "Chinese" Nano floating around (most obvious difference: presence, type, and layout of the bypass caps for the regulator.)

[Stonent]

Arduino boards are good to get a proof of concept up and running quickly.  Once you have the logic tested and functional, you can migrate to a stand-alone AVR fairly easily as long as you're not using some exotic device that requires some protocol stack.  If you think you might be targeting the MSP430, there's an Arduino front end for it as well called Energia. 

[MT]

Anyway, I feel dirty for wanting to go this apparently 'Easy' route instead of slogging on trying to get a PIC solution going.
Is this normal?

There are two attitudes...

You should fully understand everything you build, which implies you should have built the processor out of discrete TTL/CMOS - no, wait, RTL/DTL, with home-grown transistors.

You should "stand on the shoulders of giants" and choose whatever is best for achieving your goal.
One is fun and valuable. The other is fun and valuable and shows good engineering judgement.

Perhaps in the 90 it was, but to day it's....... abstract everything.........for heaven sake!

[bitseeker]

Arduino boards are good to get a proof of concept up and running quickly.  Once you have the logic tested and functional, you can migrate to a stand-alone AVR fairly easily

Exactly. Environments like the various Arduinos are great for getting your latest idea into the physical world quickly and work out functional and usability issues. If it's something for your own use, it may live on in that form just fine. If you want to mass-produce the idea, then reproduce it onto just the hardware needed in order to make it work correctly and minimize BOM. If it really takes off, then redesign again to increase integration/customization to further reduce cost and/or expedite production. That's a pretty standard lifecycle.

[obiwanjacobi]

Exactly. Environments like the various Arduinos are great for getting your latest idea into the physical world quickly and work out functional and usability issues.

Until / unless you have conflicting 'hard-coded' pin assignments, drive your device in a different way (you're going to run out of pins sooner or later) or can't get the timing you need - forcing you to change something (a timer) and have part of the Arduino API fall over...

For testing simple single components / devices - yes. For a complete solution... depends.

[bitseeker]

For testing simple single components / devices - yes. For a complete solution... depends.

Yep, all part of the fun of engineering.

[kolbep]

Just popped in quickly.
During a moment of procrastination in my other things that need to be finished ASAP,
I decided to have a quick play around.

Made up a Veroboard Shield with an RTC, and Battery (for the RTC), and a 1 Wire Temperature Sensor (and a header for external sensor).
Stuck the needed libraries in, and within 20 minutes!!!, I had it logging the Indoor and Outdoor Temperature every couple of seconds to a CSV file on an SD Card.

There was a bit of a dip in the logs during a power cut the other day (was about 45 minutes), but otherwise it has been logging consistently.
The sensor is so sensitive (Dallas DS Sensor, 2 Digits after the comma), I could actually see at 7:15 am on Sunday Morning, where somebody opened the door for a minute to let the dog out (and the sensor is on the arduino, which is 10m from the door, and not in direct line of sight.

Maybe in the next couple of weeks, I will get the Voltage logging done...

[donotdespisethesnake]

RS have an "Arduino Design Centre" http://www.rs-online.com/designspark/electronics/eng/nodes/view/type:design-centre/slug:arduino so at least someone is courting the professional market.

They also carry an Arduino based PLC http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/plc-cpus/8850929/ I wonder for what industrial applications people would choose an Arduino based system?