The firm says that microcontrollers based on the “Flycatcher” architecture will pave the way for the “internet of things” – the spread of the net to a wider range of devices.
Have an amazing project to share? The Electronics Show and Tell is every Wednesday at 7:30pm ET! To join, head over to YouTube and check out the show’s live chat and our Discord!
Python for Microcontrollers – Adafruit Daily — Python on Microcontrollers Newsletter: A New Arduino MicroPython Package Manager, How-Tos and Much More! #CircuitPython #Python #micropython @ThePSF @Raspberry_Pi
EYE on NPI – Adafruit Daily — EYE on NPI Maxim’s Himalaya uSLIC Step-Down Power Module #EyeOnNPI @maximintegrated @digikey
So cutting through all of the marketing hype… they made a low power 32 bit ARM design? I suppose that’s a good thing, though I also think that would have a ton of applications beyond this this new and supposedly magical “internet of things.”
Harry: I hate the IoT label as much as anyway … but I’m pretty impressed with the improvements on this chip compared to the existing Cortex M0, which already had very good power numbers and performance. The biggest difference to me is single-cycle IO on the M0+ versus 2 cycles on the current M0, which means you can get much better performance out of the GPIO if you have to do any complex bit-banging (LCD interfaces, etc.). This was the main reason I stuck to the M3 for LCD stuff because the IO was twice as fast when fully optimised. All in all, it looks to be a nice upgrade and they seem to have improved the right things.
Kevin: Definitely egg on my face for not actually going and reading the official ARM documentation, it certainly seems like they’ve improved a lot of features with this chip. It just seems strange that of all of those amazing features, they chose to advertise the fact that it would be better for the “internet of things.”
So cutting through all of the marketing hype… they made a low power 32 bit ARM design? I suppose that’s a good thing, though I also think that would have a ton of applications beyond this this new and supposedly magical “internet of things.”
Harry: I hate the IoT label as much as anyway … but I’m pretty impressed with the improvements on this chip compared to the existing Cortex M0, which already had very good power numbers and performance. The biggest difference to me is single-cycle IO on the M0+ versus 2 cycles on the current M0, which means you can get much better performance out of the GPIO if you have to do any complex bit-banging (LCD interfaces, etc.). This was the main reason I stuck to the M3 for LCD stuff because the IO was twice as fast when fully optimised. All in all, it looks to be a nice upgrade and they seem to have improved the right things.
Kevin: Definitely egg on my face for not actually going and reading the official ARM documentation, it certainly seems like they’ve improved a lot of features with this chip. It just seems strange that of all of those amazing features, they chose to advertise the fact that it would be better for the “internet of things.”