IMO, the Stamp code is kind of primitive by comparison to the OOPic,
no background processing, no hardware object support, no true A2D (still!)
While the Stamps are solid as a mountain on reliability, support and
software examples, they are kind of dated in their approach.
The OOPics are a lower cost option that offer some nice robotics hardware
object support like the niftier PIC and AVR compilers do, but with an OO
kind of approach that (I at least) find appealing. If you write code for
the OOPic like you write code for a Stamp you will run as slow or slower
than the Stamps and won't get the advantages of the OO Virtual Circuit
approach. You will also feel that it is more complex than the Stamp, like
you mentioned. However, very sophisticated code can be written by just
linking robot objects together and turning the VC loose. I wrote a line
follower on an OOPic R that used three or four objects and about 15 lines
of code. It works better than just about every other line follower in our
local club. It almost felt like I was cheating...
Yeah, I wrote a book about the OOPic, so I am perhaps a bit jaded, but I
like to use a lot of the other embedded processors out there too, so I'm
not shilling for Savage Innovations.
: I had a basic OOPIC (version 1). Ya, it works
: but the computer software code is a hassle compared to
: a Basic Stamp Code of logic low (off) and logic high (on).
: Logic High to turn on gates, bases, etc..
: Just buy a Basic StampII kit with software, serial cable, etc... and you'll
: see more simplicity.
:> I am looking for a basic OOPIC robot kit for around $200. Does anyone
:> know of any good kits.
:> Thank you in advance for any help, Curtis
* Dennis Clark email@example.com www.techtoystoday.com *
Click to see the full signature.