I've dug through most of the 'Uno Punto Zero' suggestions, and the one I haven't found (which I'd expected) is the proposal of adding a third, 0.1" grid compatible row of headers, like a Seeediuno.
I am not suggesting that the existing headers are changed. I am only suggesting that another row of holes, next to the 8+8 digital/PWM row of headers be added.
I apologise for my ignorance, but is there a reason that this has been ruled out that I have missed?
For the young people I work with, the awkwardness of the headers is one of the obstacles to them creating their own electronics that we talk about. If there were 0.1" friendly pins, we could use stripboard, veroboard, or matrix board to make shields. It might even make real PCB's easier to make because we could use 0.1" matrixboard as a guide on a drill press.
We have used the 'bent header' technique, which is relatively doable. It is a bit nerve wracking for folks new to hands on projects, who may be worried about breaking stuff, which appears to put off some teenagers. IMHO, it is better to make it easy.
Looking at an Arduino/Freeduino PCB, there may be enough room.
I admit it would disimprove the silk screen, which is an important part of the physical interface, and may be the reason it has been ruled out.
If I've missed the explanation for why this is 'verboten', please don't flame me to a crisp.
GB
If I haven't missed the explanation please don't crisp me up either
Well.. though i love the idea i dont think it is really useful.
Although i hate this irregular spacing thing myself i must admit that it is now, for years, part of the Arduino and that is is easier to bend a few headers than to completely break with backwards compatibility. The problem is, that you either have to loose compatibility with all shield that exist to the day or that you begin to make a workarround like the one on the seeduino, which in the end would be additional work for people who want it one way or another - and therefore could break the 'ideal for newbies' concept. Altough, that second version would be great...
It wouldn't hurt to put 8 holes in the board in 0.1" and offset to the correct spacing, so that those who wanted could add an 8pin header to suit. No doubt, some enterprising souls would start selling them with the new headers already in. It would make life an awful low easier making stripboard shields.
I agree with pluggy & gbulmer. Add an extra row of holes on the board's digital side and leave them un-populated. This would maintain shield compatibility, while giving people the flexibility to have 0.1" spaced connections possible without the bending hackery. The only downside I can see is that some people might start manufacturing shields that use the newer spacing, breaking compatibility with older boards.
On the other hand, people can just go out and buy a seeeduino if they want standard spaced pins. That's what's great about the ecosystem.
As far as I'm aware nobody resells the Seeed kit here (the UK) so getting hold of their stuff involves extended waits and possibly fun and games if Customs & Excise aren't in a good mood.....
Anything under £18 (or $27.64 today), is exempt from import duty and import VAT.
Anything upto £135 is exempt from import duty, but does attract import VAT.
So, even when the seller puts the cost of contents on the package, it is under the magic limit, and so you don't get held-up by Royal Mail, who will charge £8 to take the VAT off you.
If this is done like the seeeduino (with 0.2 space between the 2 headers), it would be nice to fill that space with a V+ pin. the V+ pin would be defined as having the same voltage as the AVR chip supply (may that be 5V or 3.3V) to ease the transition toward 3.3V for shields that are compatible with both voltages. To the left, next to the AREF pin, a fixed +3.3V pin could be added.
With those 2 pins, a single 18 pins header can be used instead of forcing the use of 2 separate connectors.
The same V+ pin (or maybe an Analog6 pin for SMT AVRs ?) could be added on the other side of the board between Vin and Analog 0. To the left of the RESET pin, another pad could be added with the (currently unused) pin 12 of the FT232R (sleep) as it could be useful in applications that require power down and could be reprogrammed by the host (in the internal EEPROM) for other functions such as host controlled input or output, or even 6/12/24/48Mhz clock source (nice !).
That way, another single 14 pins header can be used instead of forcing the use of 2 separate connectors.
Finally, the X3 connector could be placed to the left of this additional pin, thus making the Arduino connector a simple 2x 18 pins device aligned on a 0.1 grid ... all without breaking compatibility.
I've dug through most of the 'Uno Punto Zero' suggestions, and the one I haven't found (which I'd expected) is the proposal of adding a third, 0.1" grid compatible row of headers, like a Seeediuno.
I would be very surprised if the people involved with the 'Uno Punto Zero' effort would ever try and implement any hardware changes at all. I think there are different organizations and/or teams involved with the manufacturing of the Arduino hardware and the team working 'Uno Punto Zero' effort. The latter is to enhance and stabilize the IDE and supporting core libraries only. at least that's my impression of the subject.
I would be very surprised if the people involved with the 'Uno Punto Zero' effort would ever try and implement any hardware changes at all.
From the "Uno Punto Zero" forum header :
Forum to discuss about the official release of Arduino's conglomerate. This is both for hardware, software, examples, and documentation.
I hope this is so, since Arduino is all of that and then some, not just the IDE. Sure different people do different parts, i hope they at least follow what each other is doing and let ideas flow.
