RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] net-enabled microcontrollers for applianc es, VCRs, stereos

["Ross, Matt" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

That's what I was refering to earlier, though I thought they were
magnetically charged, not a resonance antenna..  The only reason that
wouldn't work, is because you need something to say the box is empty.
Unless, of course, you rely on the user to take the empty carton out of the
fridge...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Spurling, Shannon [mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 10:06 AM
> To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
> Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] net-enabled microcontrollers for
> applianc es, VCRs, stereos
> 
> 
> Well, while we are at it, why don't I just build a web server with a
> 74LS02? :-)
> That chip, is an eeprom. That has no CPU or logic processing hardware,
> other than addressing logic. It's cheap, because it's simple. Have any
> of you guys actually taken apart one of those security tags? 
> Do you know
> what's in it? It's a little radio transmitter, right? In the loosest
> form of the definition. It's a small antenna built to cause 
> resonance in
> another antenna that's tuned slightly different. Three copper 
> traces and
> a small fusible bridge. The little rectangular ones are based on foil
> leaves encapsulated in plastic. Once again, no logic, no CPU, no
> storage. Notice, 6502 CPU's are still around a few dollars a chip.
> Notice, they all come down in price to a specific point, then they
> stick. Why? I'll let you think about that.
> 
> Shannon Spurling
> WAN Engineer -Specialist
> 
> MOREnet, Network Services, Core Network
> 3212 LeMone Industrial Blvd.
> Columbia, MO 65201
> 
> Main:(573) 884-7200   Fax:(573)884-6673
> 
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross, Matt [mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 9:43 AM
> To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
> Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] net-enabled microcontrollers for
> applianc es, VCRs, stereos
> 
> 
> Just a thought, but what about the "Blue" credit/debit cards that
> supposedly
> have an ID chip in them? Those can't be too costly, and the way they
> would
> have to give out info to be of any use would be useful for the other
> applications we've discussed as well.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Spurling, Shannon [mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 7:59 AM
> > To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] net-enabled microcontrollers for
> > appliances, VCRs, stereos
> > 
> > 
> > It's not a PIC, it's a single chip "Web server", but it 
> > requires a PIC,
> > or some other MCU to provide logic and access the information from
> > memory or the sensors that you put in place. You have to have 
> > some sort
> > of MCU to construct or retrieve the data for the "Web 
> server" chip to
> > send out to the response. Doesn't make too much sense to me, I'd
> > integrate the MCU into the chip, but none of the chip 
> makers I've seen
> > do that. Regardless, the price is much greater than $1.00. and the
> > manufacturing cost is probably much greater than $1.00, so I 
> > don't think
> > they will be getting that cheap any time soon.
> > 
> > Shannon Spurling
> > WAN Engineer -Specialist
> > 
> > MOREnet, Network Services, Core Network
> > 3212 LeMone Industrial Blvd.
> > Columbia, MO 65201
> > 
> > Main:(573) 884-7200   Fax:(573)884-6673
> > 
> > EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael [mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 10:09 PM
> > To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > Subject: RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] net-enabled microcontrollers for
> > appliances, VCRs, stereos
> > 
> > 
> > The one I'm thinking of isn't a PIC though I've seen that one too.I
> > think
> > that one was on Slashdot. Dammit if I can find the bookmark 
> I'll post
> > it.
> > If not then ignore me as a clueless rant sucker if you like. I swear
> > I've
> > seen at least two companies selling (and I assume making) 
> web servers
> > that
> > ran on one chip and cost just about $1 each. They were very simple
> > devices
> > but still interesting. I think they did pretty much only 
> > convert data to
> > TCP packets as suitable from a webserver but umm what else would you
> > have
> > an embedded webserver do? ;>
> > 
> > I've seen some pretty damn simple LAN chips too but I 
> > couldn't swear if
> > it
> > was 1 or 2 chips or an exact price but I do remember thinking 
> > they were
> > pretty damn cheap. Could even have been surplus stuff though.
> > 
> > "The principal mark of genius is not perfection but originality, the
> > opening of new frontiers."
> >                                        -- Arthur Koestler
> > 
> > *^*^*^*
> > Michael McGlothlin <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
> > http://mlug.missouri.edu/~mogmios/projects/
> > 
> > On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Spurling, Shannon wrote:
> > 
> > >  Okay, I think I know what you are talking about, and it's 
> > not $1.00,
> > > it's around $8 (I think) in quantitys of 1000. I believe it 
> > is made by
> > > NEC, and it requires a MCU in order to work... A $10 PIC 
> > MCU is listed
> > > in the datasheet. When I first read the marketing blurb, I 
> > thought it
> > > was stand alone. All it does is create TCP packets from 
> the data you
> > > send it. Now, I could be off on the manufacturer and price, 
> > I'm going
> > > off memory here, but I clearly remember the application note. It
> > > involved three other descrete components for the sample 
> application,
> > in
> > > addition to the resistor capacitors and diodes needed. The 
> > three parts
> > > were the PIC, the TCP encoder/serial UART, and theMAX232 
> to provide
> > the
> > > 56K uplink. First off, no chip company makes a one chip ethernet
> > > encoder, because there are two seperate tasks to be done, and
> > depending
> > > on the application, they might be different. If a chip 
> > company makes a
> > > single chip ethernet solution, it's for a specific 
> contracted short
> > run
> > > application. And it would probably be something based on combining
> > masks
> > > from their two comercial components that were used to 
> prototype the
> > > application.
> > > So, first off, I'm not paying an increase of $20 a jug more 
> > for milk.
> > > And second, I'm not going to run a fiber pair or Cat5 to my 
> > groceries.
> > > The web enabled VCR would be fine, but isn't that a TVIO type
> > > appliance/service? Remember, who ever makes the web enabled
> > > entertainment components is going to fight furiously to 
> make you use
> > > their data service. Remember the CueCat? If I buy Prairie 
> > Farms Milk,
> > > will it be compatable with the central dairy interface I 
> got with my
> > > fridge? Something to think about. Besides, I don't want 
> > Evil Angelica
> > > hacking my fridge and spoiling my milk because they 
> > installed WINCE on
> > > it. It's just not needed!
> > > 
> > > Shannon 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Michael
> > > To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
> > > Sent: 12/2/01 3:04 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] net-enabled microcontrollers for
> > > appliances, VCRs, stereos
> > > 
> > > > And where are they?  Who manufactures them?  I haven't seen any,
> > > > personally.  Show me a link to a datasheet, and maybe 
> I'll believe
> > > > you.  And by the way, a network card is far less complex than an
> > > > embedded web server thing.  A NIC hooks right into the PCI bus,
> > which
> > > > already does most of the work for it.  A VCR neither 
> has a PCI bus
> > nor
> > > > a CPU which can control the NIC.  You would have to put 
> > in an extra
> > > > microcontroller, program it
> > > 
> > > If I feel energetic I'll try to find my bookmark to the site that
> > sells
> > > them. I looked breifly but couldn't find it. Bookmarks are 
> > such a pain
> > > when you get hundreds or thousands. And the web servers are cheap
> > > because
> > > they only do what they have to.. essentially providing an http
> > interface
> > > to whatever data your gadget already provides. They are 
> > made only for
> > > embedded use. You couldn't run like Google off one. A 
> > couple different
> > > companies make flavors of these ultra-lite webservers now. 
> > Again if I
> > > feel
> > > motivated I'll look for them. I'm feeling lazy right now.
> > > 
> > > > Where have you seen those chips?  I really want to 
> order a few if
> > they
> > > are 
> > > > that cheap.
> > > 
> > > The printed circuits on paper? They don't yet have a printed web
> > server
> > > that I know of but I think they would be pretty easy to do and are
> > bound
> > > to show up. Other circuits printed on paper get used in disposable
> > > places
> > > already though so we do know it works.
> > > 
> > > > Then why aren't there VCRs with network interfaces? The 
> > closest I've
> > > seen is 
> > > > a cable modem with a webserver.  But those things cost about two
> > times
> > > as 
> > > > much as a VCR, for "cheap" electronics.
> > > 
> > > VCR's suck and so do VCR makers? There might be a 
> > web-enabled VCR for
> > > all
> > > I know but I don't have one. Shouldn't be to hard to make though.
> > Price
> > > something is sold for has almost nothing to do with how 
> much it cost
> > to
> > > make. Manufacturers often breif sales people that a given 
> product is
> > > exactly the same between the cheap model and the expensive model
> > except
> > > the expensive model has a feature turned on. My favorite 
> > was a digital
> > > camera I usda sale.. hooking power to the cameras main IC 
> > at the right
> > > spot would let the camera double the resolution. Probably 
> cost less
> > than
> > > a
> > > penny to activate per camera but they charged $100 more.
> > > 
> > > > I haven't seen a wired VCR yet - probably due to two reasons:
> > > > 1. The technology is not mainstream yet
> > > The technology is mainstream, products that use the 
> > technology are not
> > > mainstream yet. Companies don't release products the second a
> > technology
> > > is available.. they have to convince mgmt it's a good 
> idea, do user
> > > studies, design, make, test, market, etc.
> > > 
> > > > 2. It's not cost-effective.
> > > *shrugs* It doesn't cost much. The cardboard box the units 
> > are shipped
> > > in
> > > probably cost as much.
> > > 
> > > > 3. Nobody wants them
> > > > I can't say that reason #3 is valid, since there would 
> be at least
> > one
> > > model 
> > > > of a VCR that had it built in.  There isn't a single 
> > thing that does
> > > it and 
> > > > is mainstream.
> > > 
> > > Could be a reason. It isn't the type of feature that is 
> likely to be
> > > well
> > > understood in most user studies. Anyway the VCR idea was just an
> > > example. Most people geeky enough for a web enabled VCR 
> > would probably
> > > want a TiVo or something. On the other hand multipurpose 
> remotes are
> > > popular.. if devices shared a common interface to such 
> remotes there
> > > could
> > > be a decent business in it.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> > > 
> > > Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> > > 
> > > Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> > > 
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> > 
> > Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> > 
> > Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> > 
> --
> To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> 
> Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> --
> To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> 
> Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> 
--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/