[HN Gopher] Liberating Wi-Fi on the ESP32 [video]
___________________________________________________________________
Liberating Wi-Fi on the ESP32 [video]
Author : doener
Score : 296 points
Date : 2024-12-28 00:03 UTC (22 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (media.ccc.de)
(TXT) w3m dump (media.ccc.de)
| jakeogh wrote:
| https://github.com/esp32-open-mac
| ryao wrote:
| Why are wifi ICs so expensive? It seems to me that it is cheaper
| to buy an ESP32 to connect to a RP2040 for wifi than it is to buy
| a dedicated wifi IC.
| equestria wrote:
| The wifi protocol is computationally intensive. The wifi module
| is effectively a fast 32-bit computer with fairly complex
| firmware. And then, there's all the RF engineering that needs
| to happen to make it work.
|
| So, the original thinking was "if you need wifi, we can't price
| a standalone chip competitively, just buy a SoC". But the
| genius of ESP32 was that they approached it the other way
| round: they built a wifi chip, and then figured they can carve
| out some room for user code. No need to pay for a separate MCU.
| This worked for a lot of customers, and the economies of scale
| took care of the rest.
| rkagerer wrote:
| How is progress toward a useable open source alternative?
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| Virtually non-existent? There aren't that many people doing
| open RF hardware, and all of the ones I'm familiar with are
| working with SDR because the costs go up massively once you
| go to tapeout.
| ryao wrote:
| I am not sure if you can still get the chips, but these are
| fully OSS:
|
| https://github.com/qca/open-ath9k-htc-firmware
| brcmthrowaway wrote:
| Why doesnt Apple use ESP32
| epcoa wrote:
| While they're only now coming out with even a 5GHz model
| there isn't really much in Apple's product line that needs
| a lowend primarily "IoT" WiFi. Maybe the HomePod, but they
| already have better chipsets for their flagship devices.
| mystified5016 wrote:
| Because the ESP can only barely do WiFi. You can get a
| couple of Mbps under ideal conditions. It is _not_ a
| general purpose WiFi adapter, it 's a low power IoT chip.
|
| A general purpose WiFi adapter can do gigabit sustained
| connections over PCI or some other high speed interface.
| Entirely different class of chip.
| emilfihlman wrote:
| A couple?
|
| It easily goes to tens of Mb/s.
| yonatan8070 wrote:
| Which is still abysmal compared to what a modern Wi-Fi
| chipset can push, even in the real world. Even an old
| home-grade Wi-Fi 5 AP can push >400Mbps over the air in
| real-world conditions. And the Wi-Fi 6/6e/7 devices can
| go well above that.
| shakna wrote:
| Anecdote only: I've never consistently managed 10mb/s
| without integrating some sort of cooling system. Not
| without frying the chip.
| chedabob wrote:
| To what end?
|
| I can't think of an Apple product that needs low power Wifi
| and/or Bluetooth, and also operates at such a low price-
| point that there's not budget to put something bigger on
| the BoM.
| bschwindHN wrote:
| * Too slow * Uses too much power
|
| Apple products would absolutely suck if they used ESP32 for
| their wifi and Bluetooth functionality.
| mystified5016 wrote:
| To chime in, adding the espressif WiFi libraries to your
| firmware adds 500-600KB of code. In the trivial IoT widget I
| just made, the firmware is >90% espressif code by weight.
|
| The RAM use is also... noticeable. It takes quite a lot for
| this chip do WiFi.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| It is similar for BLE. I recently wrote firmware for nrf52
| device. Proprietary blob was 100 KB. My code was 60 KB and
| actually like 40-50 KB was caused by crypto library which
| is basically required part of BLE stack as well, just
| distributed with code and not in the blob.
| zazaulola wrote:
| ESP32 has 18 ADC input channels. But if you are using Wifi,
| you can only use 8 of the 18 for ADC conversion: GPIO pins
| 32-39.
|
| Other 10 pins, on which ADC2 channels are possible, can
| only accept pulse data if you are using Wifi.
|
| This is probably due to firmware limitations.
| mystified5016 wrote:
| Espressif implies that the WiFi hardware uses ADC2 for
| something. It sounds like a hardware limitation, a
| firmware issue would have been patched a long time ago.
| ryao wrote:
| It sounds like Qualcomm missed an opportunity here:
|
| https://github.com/qca/open-ath9k-htc-firmware
| numpad0 wrote:
| Wi-Fi chips always had "user" program area, in theory anyone
| could call any of chip vendor, and with NDA, $$$ an 5 years
| of back and forth, could have met the exact same goal as what
| you can do today with ESP32, even in 2010. I've seen a
| Twitter ticker display made from a mPCI Wi-Fi card in a maker
| meeting back then. The guy demoing it was a company engineer
| with access to internal docs, wasn't giving it to anyone
| else.
|
| The genius of Espressif was that they didn't issue C&D
| letters and DMCA takedowns when people started modifying
| firmware for their product using garden variety GCC without
| even asking and then ported hobbyist garbage called Arduino
| Core. They did initially panic a bit, but soon their
| management realized it's a golden ticket to something, and
| they bet the whole company on it. And they got the return
| they deserve.
|
| There aren't a lot of aspects that are technically so
| advanced about ESP8266/ESP32. It's just the ones made by the
| hungriest and most aspiring Wi-Fi chip manufacturer.
| ryao wrote:
| Is there a write up somewhere talking about the panicking?
| It might be interesting to read. I am curious how they
| enabled people to do this without realizing people would do
| it.
| numpad0 wrote:
| I wasn't in the scene directly but was only watching it
| from great distance. It was literally a decade ago, too.
| Maybe someone can ask Espressif for their side of battle
| story, but I don't have any more to offer, sorry.
| phoronixrly wrote:
| I also share the opinion of the fellow commentor and blame the
| price on the fact that RF front-ends require lots of RnD, often
| require high quality and precision components (outside the IC)
| AND on top of that there are testing and certification costs.
| All of this in just the RF front-end, we are not even talking
| about the implementation of the absurdly bloated wifi standars
| in software/silicon and testing and certification for them.
| userbinator wrote:
| Only the ones which have a presence outside of China are
| expensive.
| phoronixrly wrote:
| Why is that? Cost of labor? Looser regulatory requirements?
| tw04 wrote:
| He's telling you that they violate IP law extensively in
| products that don't leave the country. It's a lot cheaper
| to mass produce cheap WiFi chips when you can do it with
| stolen IP.
| userbinator wrote:
| They have a very different view of IP than the west.
| Sharing is the norm.
| dgfitz wrote:
| Does that work for other things? Can I just say "I had a
| different view of that" and get away with whatever it
| was?
| vbezhenar wrote:
| For many people, information and physical items are
| completely different entities. When you steal bottle of
| milk, the original owner loses access to it. When you
| copy information without permission, the original owner
| keeps the access to it. So they have completely different
| attitude to those two behaviours.
| aleph_minus_one wrote:
| > For many people, information and physical items are
| completely different entities. When you steal bottle of
| milk, the original owner loses access to it. When you
| copy information without permission, the original owner
| keeps the access to it.
|
| Relevant:
|
| Copying Is Not Theft
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4
| Copying is not theft. Stealing a thing leaves one
| less left Copying it makes one thing more;
| that's what copying's for. Copying is not
| theft. If I copy yours you have it too One
| for me and one for you That's what copies can do
| If I steal your bicycle you have to take the bus,
| but if I just copy it there's one for each of us!
| Making more of a thing, that is what we call
| "copying" Sharing ideas with everyone That's
| why copying is FUN!
| vel0city wrote:
| So what I can walk into any store and walk out with a
| cart full and not pay and it's all good, sharing is the
| norm? I can just walk into any apartment complex and move
| into any unit without pay since sharing is the norm?
| Hasnep wrote:
| No, that's not what anyone said. The conversation is
| about copyright...
| vel0city wrote:
| So it's not that "sharing is the norm" it's a difference
| in the understanding of ownership and property rights.
| Otherwise why not share the food and share the housing,
| since sharing is the norm and not the exception when it
| comes to property rights?
|
| Otherwise why is sharing the norm in one small specific
| instance and not the rest?
| Liftyee wrote:
| The original statement was in the context of IP. In this
| case, no one has anything taken away when it is shared.
| Sharing physical goods requires them to be taken from
| somewhere/someone... not so much for digital information,
| which can be duplicated infinitely.
| semiquaver wrote:
| This is a funny comment in the context of a discussion
| about a (nominally) communist country.
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| Well, those things aren't IP. Maybe you could take
| pictures of all the pages in a book in a bookstore?
| vel0city wrote:
| So _only intellectual property_ is shared? Doesn 't sound
| to me like sharing is the norm when it only applies to
| one category of goods.
| userbinator wrote:
| Try reading my comment fully again? I was talking about
| IP.
| userbinator wrote:
| Read this if you don't believe me:
| https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2014/from-gongkai-to-
| open...
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| "sharing is the norm" means publishing.
|
| Taking is the norm.
| tw04 wrote:
| Which is super weird, because Xioami isn't "sharing"
| their proprietary OS with any other phone manufacturers.
|
| CATL isn't "sharing" any of their battery IP with
| competitors. They consider it trade secret and will
| actively pursue recourse inside or out of China.
|
| What is apparent is they use cultural misunderstanding to
| justify stealing IP, even though they actively try to
| protect their own inside and outside of the country.
|
| https://www.ess-news.com/2024/10/28/calb-sues-catl-over-
| pate...
| tialaramex wrote:
| It's normal. IIRC Early America didn't have Copyright or
| other protections, they were added later once it was
| making its own works and had skin in the game.
| azinman2 wrote:
| So now that China has skin in the game, will they very
| soon stop stealing IP by your logic?
| wildzzz wrote:
| Copyright and patents have been a part of the US since
| before day one. It's in Article 1, Section 8 of the
| Constitution and was even part of the Articles of
| Confederation.
|
| Patents were established even before Columbus.
| numpad0 wrote:
| I don't think they actually do. They're not dumb or
| crazy. What I think sets Chinese companies apart from
| Western counterparts is their aptitude for _making money
| through selling physical things_. Everyone else drove off
| to casinos and they 're the last ones in the factory
| dirtying hands.
| obscurette wrote:
| As someone growing up in Soviet Union, sharing was the
| norm for us as well until we were in this s**t together
| and nobody had any chance to earn much from it anyway.
| This changed quite fast in nineties though.
| mindslight wrote:
| IP is defined by RFCs, not law.
|
| (damn, the imaginary property maximalists really came out
| of the woodwork on this thread)
| nereye wrote:
| The WiFi (& Bluetooth) IC used in the Pi Pico W retails for
| ~$2.5, and presumably a bit less in volume (considering the
| Pico W is only $2 more than the base Pi Pico.
| ryao wrote:
| Where can you find it for $2.5? The last I looked, it was
| around $6.
| ta988 wrote:
| They are talking about the radio chip that's on the Pico W.
| not the whole pico w.
| ryao wrote:
| I am asking about the radio chip. The last I checked,
| buying one from a distributor costs around $6. You would
| need to do a huge order to get the price down to $2.5 per
| chip. The required order quantity is so huge that
| distributors do not list it.
| nereye wrote:
| From https://octopart.com/search?q=CYW43439¤cy=USD&
| specs=0.
|
| Indeed the lowest price $2.551 from Arrow has a MOQ of
| 5000 but Newark does have it for a promotional price of
| $2.73 for quantities as low as 1.
|
| It's not $2.5 but that's why it was quoted as ~$2.5 in my
| reply, since it's in the ballpark.
| blkhawk wrote:
| you can get certain variants of the esp32 at around 2USD.
| that gets you a whole board with USB-c.
| baq wrote:
| Esp32-c3 super mini is less than $2 with free shipping from
| AliExpress. The usb-c cable I use to power it is more
| expensive. I get a serious cognitive dissonance when I think
| about it too much.
| Aurornis wrote:
| The Espressif chips are WiFi ICs. You can buy the bare chips,
| connect over SDIO, load the hosted firmware, and use them as
| WiFi radio chips.
|
| For volume production (10K, 100K, or more units) you can get
| other WiFi ICs that are cheaper than buying an ESP32 module.
| The difference is that other companies don't care about
| engaging the hobby and low volume markets so they don't put an
| effort into making them cheap.
|
| If you're doing one-off builds, you're at the mercy of whoever
| decides to make an effort to make things cheap and accessible.
| Some companies deliberately make their products hard or even
| impossible to access for hobbyists because it's not worth it
| unless you're the hobbyist market leader (Espressif)
| ryao wrote:
| Do you mean this firmware?
|
| https://github.com/espressif/esp-hosted
|
| I assume it uses the blob that is mentioned in the video.
| denysvitali wrote:
| Related article: https://zeus.ugent.be/blog/23-24/open-source-
| esp32-wifi-mac/
| redfast00 wrote:
| Author here; see also the entire series of posts on
| https://esp32-open-mac.be/
| nraynaud wrote:
| I would like to submit that making the open source version
| compatible with the closed source API might be an asset.
|
| By being compatible, users get all the benefits of the existing
| corpus of help on the internet. And being compatible make the
| cost to entry lower. If somebody wants to make a very small
| modification of the MAC layer, they can do it as with the
| closed source and just go behind the curtain and file a little
| the thing they want to hack, without the cognitive load of
| learning a new API.
| jsheard wrote:
| I haven't had chance to watch the video yet so apologies if this
| is covered, but are the ESP32 radios regulatory certifications
| tied to the official black box firmware? Would the same hardware
| but with open firmware need to be sent to the FCC (and others)
| again for proper compliance?
| mystified5016 wrote:
| Yes.
| dlcarrier wrote:
| Yes, if distributed that way. No, if modified by the end user.
|
| I don't remember the CFR off hand, but the FCC explicitly
| allows anyone to use small numbers of uncertified devices. It
| would still be a violation if those devices don't otherwise
| follow regulations, but using modified hardware or software
| isn't itself prohibited.
| jdietrich wrote:
| 15.23, but it applies specifically to "home-built devices",
| so I'm not sure if modification of a commercially available
| device would be within scope. Devices constructed from a kit
| are specifically excluded.
|
| https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/section-15.23
| ssl-3 wrote:
| Are home-built devices allowed to be made using things like
| pre-manufactured valves and transistors?
|
| What about integrated circuits?
|
| Where's the line drawn?
|
| Am I allowed to order some parts from Digikey and assemble
| them into a widget, or must I start closer to the beginning
| by mining my own ores?
| TomatoCo wrote:
| If you can't make your own protons store bought is okay.
| jgerrish wrote:
| This could change depending on the fallout from the current
| drone saga, no pun intended. Or other upcoming events.
|
| Even if it's not FCC regulations, but some other agencies,
| there may be some close re-examination of what's allowed due
| to safety.
|
| I'm guessing certain manufacturers are going to be impacted
| more than others.
|
| I'm sorry for the uncertainty in boardrooms and garages
| across the world. I diversified my embedded sources but damn
| it's annoying.
|
| But I suppose that's the machine.
|
| I just picked up an ESP32-C6 for some mostly legal Bluetooth
| and maybe Zigbee experiments. I don't plan on hacking to this
| level, the Rust ecosystem is welcoming enough to make just
| building fun so far.
|
| On a side note, I stepped in shit today. I know I have five
| q-tips in storage somewhere. And a few more in the closet.
| Sorry for the weird tangent.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| The power and directionality rules for ISM bands are good
| guidelines for not interfering with other's use of the band.
| If you have another story that makes interference unlikely,
| it probably also makes it unlikely to get caught. Plenty of
| items for sale on Amazon don't have any silkscreen on chips
| or boards, much less an FCC id. If they can get away with
| it...
| numpad0 wrote:
| I think it's a gray area. If I'm not grossly mistaken, only
| worst case radio performances are tested and documented, and
| the rest of required technical documents are more of rather
| detailed brochures like high level block diagrams and theory of
| operations than modern full design documents like PCB
| manufacturing files and firmware build scripts. They hardly
| acknowledge existence of firmware.
|
| And there is at least one good reason: certified and unlicensed
| radio equipment, like Wi-Fi(or unlike HAM) are expected to be
| tamper resistant, for public good. And so last time FCC
| discussed certification requirements for Wi-Fi routers, they
| naturally considered extending it to software in form of
| mandatory Secure Boot - for every ultra vulnerable garbage Wi-
| Fi routers! That was a horrible idea and was scrapped.
|
| For now, I think, IANAL, this is semi-legal or semi-illegal
| unless resulting firmware clearly generates out-of-spec
| emissions.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| > And there is at least one good reason: certified and
| unlicensed radio equipment, like Wi-Fi(or unlike HAM) are
| expected to be tamper resistant, for public good.
|
| This is such an own-goal.
|
| The way manufacturers implement this is by locking out third
| party firmware. Then the device goes out of support a decade
| before people stop using it, but because nobody else can
| update it either -- and the manufacturer has higher internal
| support costs because there is no community submitting
| patches they could just adopt and ship -- the device gets
| full of public unpatched security vulnerabilities. Which at
| scale is a significant threat to national security. On top of
| losing whatever other benefits the public would derive from
| the community being able to fix firmware bugs or add
| features.
|
| Meanwhile the purpose of the requirement is supposed to be to
| keep users from modifying the radio parameters to exceed
| regulatory limits. Which, first of all, hardly anybody is
| going to do anyway, because the vast majority of people don't
| even know how and most of the remainder aren't interested in
| risking huge fines just to avoid buying a second access
| point. But the people who _are_ going to do it, because the
| devices don 't get patched, can just use the vulnerabilities
| to root them and then modify the radio parameters anyway.
|
| Which makes it a pointless rule that _compromises_ the public
| good.
| numpad0 wrote:
| What you've said is why a lot of people voiced concerns to
| that suggested changes, leading to it getting safely
| cancelled, while the same cohort of people were and are
| fine with existing anti-tamper requirements.
|
| I guess it's another anecdotal datapoint that shows
| disastrous state of the field called software engineering,
| especially relative to other professional fields of
| engineering(cf. https://xkcd.com/2030/).
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| The requirement also feigns innocence.
|
| As far as I can tell there is no actual requirement to
| block third party firmware, merely a vague rule that says
| they have to do _something_. But designing hardware
| specifically to enforce the regulatory limits even if the
| firmware requests otherwise would cost money whereas
| blocking third party firmware just screws over the
| public, so in practice that 's what they pick when you
| force them to check the box.
|
| On top of that, using that method is also the least
| effective because then any firmware vulnerability still
| allows regulatory limits to be exceeded. And if you're
| okay with that then there are plenty of alternative
| measures that could be used to check the box at low cost
| as long as you don't care that they're not very
| effective. But somehow that's a failing for the
| alternatives whereas with software it's just _expected_
| to be rubbish.
| imglorp wrote:
| Side question. One of the speakers gave his DECT number. Does
| that mean people are still carrying around old phones just to use
| at tech conferences?
| phoronixrly wrote:
| I think it's a CCC tradition.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| Yes, I was looking at the conference website before it started
| and they still operate DECT phones.
| sllabres wrote:
| They operate several different networks for voice
| communications during the events. From what I found usually
| DECT, SIP, GSM. [1] They have a status dashboard with metrics
| during the events. [2]
|
| [1] https://events.ccc.de/2024/12/22/38c3-poc-isdn-version/
|
| [2]
| https://dashboard.eventphone.de/d/de7sgxz63vzeoe/38c3?orgId=...
| legulere wrote:
| Some years ago they also operated a pneumatic tube system.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| Yes it's pretty handy for hacker camps. I still have one too.
| Especially because out on the camping fields the WiFi coverage
| can be hit and miss. This way you can even get calls when you
| walked to the toilet building or the car park.
|
| Also it's got its own frequency so it's not cluttering the ones
| used for WiFi, Bluetooth, Zigbee etc.
|
| I guess they could use an app or something but dect is rock
| stable and has much better range than WiFi.
|
| I got a nice Siemens one that is about the size of a nokia 8210
| so it's not like you have to carry a huge brick either. I guess
| the battery is pretty dead now though. But it is replaceable
| like all batteries of that time.
| wildzzz wrote:
| I never considered DECT phones as anything more than cordless
| landline phones for your home that can intercom between each
| other. Even the cordless phone systems in the US you can buy
| are usually 2.4GHz ISM now.
| ElectRabbit wrote:
| DECT is still extremely popular within (private) houses in
| Germany.
|
| Way more robust than VoIP over Wifi.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| Yes, although you can also use GSM or SIP and it's often called
| a DECT number even if you're actually on one of the newer
| networks, since the number space is the same. DECT simply was
| there first and thus became the generic term for the internal
| phone network.
| _Microft wrote:
| Don't they even have an ISDN network there this year?
| anigbrowl wrote:
| One step closer to a microPython library that supports
| promiscuous mode...
| jdjdne wrote:
| Why? That's already supported in the ESP SDK
| cyberax wrote:
| I had a cool idea for WiFi password provisioning once: it's
| possible to modulate the packet _length_ to transmit the SSID and
| the password. A new IoT device obviously can't decrypt the
| packets, but it can observe their length.
|
| I even made a sample implementation for Linux. Unfortunately, I
| couldn't find a single IoT chip that would give low-level access
| to the PHY good enough for this :(
| tonetegeatinst wrote:
| Reverse engineering as a last resort or is this not possible?
| cyberax wrote:
| I'm no good at reverse engineering. I run away screaming in
| horror at the sight of Ghidra.
|
| Cleaning up the Linux code and publishing it is on my TODO
| list...
| fragmede wrote:
| That's how TI's SmartConfig works, via the length field, so you
| could just use any IoT chip that implements that, of which TI
| offers a bunch.
| 05 wrote:
| Also supported by Espressif under their own name
| "Airkiss/ESPTouch".
|
| Unfortunately since the chip doesn't support 5G WiFi it's a
| mess where you need to switch the phone to a different 2.4
| only network, configure the device, then switch back. Better
| to just use BLE..
| shim__ wrote:
| Nowdays I'd just use WPA3
| lights0123 wrote:
| https://www.keacher.com/xmas24/ uses OOK for data
| communication, with the benefit of energy harvesting the WiFi
| signal to not require batteries.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| Yeah I remember with the 8266 we could do all sorts of cool stuff
| but Expressif took it upon themselves to block a whole range of
| operations with the ESP32 :'(
|
| I guess that they had no choice, the 8266 was originally meant to
| only be used in serial to WiFi converters but it kinda exploded
| in the maker community. I guess that drew regulator attention.
|
| But cool to see that this is being worked around.
| ElectRabbit wrote:
| Still super weird that Espressif is the only company that managed
| it to get a Wifi modem into a more or less decent
| microcontroller.
|
| ST still far behind when it comes to this stuff.
| smat wrote:
| Nordic semiconductor also has microcontrollers with BT and
| Wifi. They are much less common than espressifs solution
| though.
| ElectRabbit wrote:
| BT/Wifi on a single chip? Do you have a part number?
|
| That'd be revolutionary.
|
| I love the ESP32. But they love (too much) current.
| Arch-TK wrote:
| https://www.nordicsemi.com/Products/Wireless/WiFi/Products?
| l...
|
| Search for the SiPs and SoCs, they all support BLE.
| barbegal wrote:
| But these solutions require two chips, one for bluetooth
| and one for wifi where the ESP32 does it all in one.
| Arch-TK wrote:
| Ah yes, you're right, I misunderstood their page.
| 3abiton wrote:
| Because the prices are not competitive enough for hobbyists.
| How can you expect people to adopt and develop on top of your
| chips if they can't afford it?
| elromulous wrote:
| Fyi, while Nordic products are usually excellent, they did
| not design the wifi ics. They bought a company and slapped
| their name on the chips. I haven't used them yet, but from
| what I've heard they don't live up to Nordic's standard.
|
| Edit: also afaik they don't have a mcu+wifi in one yet.
| chpatrick wrote:
| Most TuYa-based modules on AliExpress are Beken.
| vdfs wrote:
| Other examples:
|
| - BK72xx Ex: BK7231T, BK7231N
|
| - RTL87xx Ex: RTL8710BN, RTL8710BX
|
| - RP2040 But seems like the wifi is an extranl module in W
| boards
|
| Taken from https://esphome.io
| odiroot wrote:
| Beken modules are so weirdly cheap. I've seen them inside 2PS
| LED bulbs in discount stores.
| arghwhat wrote:
| WiFi and Bluetooth for the Raspberry Pico W is provided by an
| Infineon CYW43439
| (https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/wireless-
| connectivit...), which has its own ARM cores.
| trelliscoded wrote:
| TI has had wifi+bluetooth microcontrollers for almost a decade
| now, and you get a cortex m4.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| Those are great in a professional context, but the CC3200s
| never had a <$10 Chinese breakout board.
|
| And they're programmed in IAR or CCS instead of in the
| Arduino IDE, and they're programmed with an RTOS and the
| Cortex M4's powerful ISR engine instead of just a "while"
| loop.
|
| ESP32/ESP8266 are basically optimized to be hobbyist-
| friendly, while most other wireless systems are not.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| They hit the right combo of cheap ($EUR), accessible (you can
| buy them everywhere, shipped everywhere, even in quantities of
| 1), easy to use hardware (they're sold on many different
| 'breakout boards' with usb connectors for power and programming
| and marked pins), easy to use software (documentation,
| examples, arduino ide, nodemcu) and without any weird limits
| licencing wise.
|
| Arduino was similar at first, but stayed on low-performance avr
| chips for way too long and non-chinese ones were expensive (and
| well, no wifi), rpi pico has some nice features, but much
| harder to get at first, and everything else is a "raw chip"
| bought on sites like digikey, with expensive shipping, 600+
| pages of documentation, 300+ of them needed to send a first
| ping, you need to solder them onto a board and programming
| usually requires some expensive rig.
| bbayer wrote:
| I am really impressed by how young speakers are. It is really
| fascinating to see how somebody collect such technical knowledge
| at such a young age.
| SarahC_ wrote:
| Dude on the left looks like my doppleganger...... I had to
| think back to remember what I'd being doing recently - nope, no
| holes in my memory!
| Frostie314159 wrote:
| Haha how cool, are you on the 38c3 too?
| jpablo wrote:
| Everything is out in the open nowadays. Kids can start learning
| whatever they what an younger and younger ages.
|
| A perfect example is chess. It used that a lot of knowledge was
| in books, often in foreign languages. Nowadays everything is
| out there in the open and additionally you can casually play
| games against top 100 opposition once you are okeish enough
| accelerating the development even more.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-12-28 23:00 UTC)