Member Since: March 28, 2010

Country: United States

  • News - February Caption Contest | about a year ago

    Step 1: Lock humans in closet - Done

    Step 2: Acquire dog fort chassis - Done

    Step 3: Upgrade dog fort sensor and commo suites. - Parts acquired, assembly pending

  • Product DEV-11188 | about a year ago

    I miswrote. I meant the Pro Mini

  • Product DEV-11188 | about a year ago

    Any chance at getting one of these for the Arduino Pro? Could really use it, especially for the FTDI connection.

    I used one in a project, didn’t want to permanently solder in that set of headers (trying to keep it small), but needed to program the device. Ended up making one up out of a breadboard and pogo pins, but it was a pita to use…

  • Product BOB-10653 | about 2 years ago

    Do you have any of the old ones left? I built some circuits around the pinout from that one, and need at least 2 more of the old-style one…

  • Tutorial - A ProMicro Installation and Arduino Briefing | about 2 years ago

    Are the drivers digitally signed so that it works with Win 7?

    Can you use it with older Arduino environments (pre-1.0)?

  • Product PGM-09825 | about 2 years ago

    After beating my head against the wall for a while trying to get this to work under Windows 7, I finally got it working. Brief write-up here:


  • Product PGM-09825 | about 2 years ago

    This did not work for me.

  • Product WRL-08602 | about 2 years ago

    I struggled with this thing for a while, but finally got it working with an Arduino. Details here:


  • News - In Your Lifetime | about 3 years ago

    Not necessarily. First off, most chips are way less efficient than that theoretical limit - the actual time to perform an instruction is way higher than the time to send a signal all the way across the chip (most instructions require multiple steps, and take several clock cycles to implement). So even with the same exact transistor size, there’s room for improvement by using those transistors in a more efficient way (compare, for example, the performance of pipelined processors compared to their non-pipelined contemporaries - the pipelined ones are significantly faster, even if the same exact transistor tech is used).
    Second, what you stated is only true for transistors as we know them - if you can make the data travel between transistors faster (such as optical rather than electrical connections), you increase speed without making the transistor smaller. Or, if you replace the transistor with some other device (quantum computers perhaps?) the whole calculus changes. Finally, there are other bottlenecks in a typical computer system (such as the CPU to RAM bus), the elimination of which can significantly improve the speed of the device, even with no improvement of the actual CPU speed.
    As I said, if we are talking Moore’s law in the sense of size or count of transistors, then yes, it may well be slowing down. But that’s not very interesting.
    The author’s thesis was that this would lead to the shift from disposable to non-disposable electronics. I don’t see that. I think computers, music players, phones, etc. are going to keep improving in speed, size, storage capacity, etc. for a long time. Whether that improvement comes from smaller transistors or some other tech, who cares?

  • News - In Your Lifetime | about 3 years ago

    Good point. With more and more shift away from a manufacturing economy and towards a knowledge/information economy (at least here in the US), there’s less and less reason to physically go to work. If more people were willing to handle business matter remotely, cars would be far less of a problem.
    Sadly, I work in a completely information-based industry (I’m an accountant - all I ever deal with is data), I run my own company (with a partner), and I still can’t telecommute - the clients insist on meeting face-to-face, the employees need daily contact, and there are still too many physical processes involved. So I drive 45min-1h to and from work every day… Sigh…

No public wish lists :(