next topic »

[Reply #15 on:]

The micro plug would be nice as well, but I'm not sure it has enough market share (beyond cell phones) to warrant it. (Despite being higher quality, smaller, and more durable)


If that helps a bit with the debate between Mini vs. Micro USB, here's a quick tally I did by thinking of devices I own.

Inventory of Large USB type B devices:

1 laser printer

If I'd do a random inventory of items that use Mini USB I'd come up with:
4 Cameras
1 Radar detector
3 portable navigation devices (Garmin Nuvi, TomTom, Mio)
2 external hard drives
2 Blackberries
2 Ipod chargers
1 mini speaker system
__
15 devices that I can think of of the top of my head.

Micro USB
1 Droid cell phone
1 external hard drive
_
2 devices that I can think of.


In the end, maybe an online vote might help sway the designers of Arduinos. Please understand that having a large plug is not a dealbreaker, but it is an inconvenience.

[Reply #16 on:]

I wonder if the Arduino team has taken any hints from any derivative designs

http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/seeeduino-v22-atmega-328p-p-669.html?cPath=79_80

mini-USB connector since USB-B is too tall for bigger shields

reset button moved to the side so shields don't cover the button

extra row of headers with standard spacing instead of weird spacing so people can make their own shields out of perf board

[Reply #17 on:]

I'd prefer micro USB, but I'm willing to settle for mini USB.  It's the one detail on the Arduino that bothers me enough to consider clones.  (I like the Freetronics clone design.)

I'm a complete hardware newbie, so I can't even imagine constructing my own cable to interface with the USB port.

I'd be interested in having RTC onboard, along with networking.

[Reply #18 on:]

please consider fixing the digital pin spacing

probably will never happen as it will break shield compatibility

[Reply #19 on:]

I'd be interested in having RTC onboard

I double that!,
A battery holder and the holes for an I2C RTC eg ds1307 wouldn't raise the price and if one needs it it can be included.

[Reply #20 on:]

FWIW from Wikipedia

# The newer Micro-USB receptacles are designed for up to 10,000 cycles of insertion and removal between the receptacle and plug, compared to 1500 for the standard USB and 5000 for the Mini-USB receptacle. This is accomplished by adding a locking device and by moving the leaf-spring connector from the jack to the plug, so that the most-stressed part is on the cable side of the connection. This change was made so that the connector on the less expensive cable would bear the most wear instead of the more expensive micro-USB device.

Also the big USB has same problem as ethernet, without spacer posts between boards the connector shell can short out the board above.

[Reply #21 on:]

There are only a couple of reasons that I can see the justification for the mini-USB connector:

1) Availability of power adaptors/wall warts with a mini-USB plug output.
2) No worries about a shield "shorting out" with the mini-USB jack.

The one I'm thinking of is that it's so hard to plug in the cable. This combined with lack of good ways to mount the arduino mean that if I don't hold the arduino while plugging in the cable, it is likely to break the double sided tape I use to hold it down.

Also, my connector extends 2.2 inches from the end of the USB connector, and 2.2 inches from the end of the arduino board itself. That means I can't have anything for 2 inches after the end of the arduino, which is quite hard in my one foot square projects.

[Reply #22 on:]

Adding a jumper to enable Auto reset instead of cutting a track.

[Reply #23 on:]

How about just preventing "short circuit" to board above.

If they dont go with smaller USB, then just a sticky to put on top of the connector.  I insulated the tops of my USB and ethernet shield connectors with heavy tape, but one of the thin rubber bump feet included would work as well.

I vote against fixing the non standard header spacing, unless someone has a time machine that one falls under "great idea, but too late now"

[Reply #24 on:]

Changing to 20MHz is a nice idea but not practical, too disruptive a change, too many people's stuff would break (remember bootloaded 328's have the 16MHz assumption programmed in)  Having the option to buy a board with no regulator and crystal would allow people to configure their own clock and voltage - or these could be jumper options.  More and more stuff is 3V3 only these days...

In longer term there will be a next generation with more processing power and memory, almost certainly an ARM core I reckon, but that's not the next iteration.

It would be fun to have an LED on every digital pin for debugging/visualization - low current, possibly jumper enabled.  There's acres of space on the board next to the digital pins crying out for a good use!  

[Reply #25 on:]

The gang at freetronics provided the option to do somethin with that space

[Reply #26 on:]

Heck, maybe I'll try my own. I prefer 5V wallwarts, skip the meager power of onboard regulator



fit 2 on a 3.8" x 2.5" pcb, just need to finish up powere/ground on top & bottom layer



Get 6 PCBs made up for $60 from epxresspcb, research prices for parts, all thru-hole components.  
Then bag it all and get $10 ardweeny's from solarbotics and a piece of perfboard to put it on :-)

[Reply #27 on:]

FWIW, Ceramic resonators are alot more stable and accurate then there made out to be.
I wish they would add a 5-6v zener diode across the 5v line with a fuse/circuit breaker/resistor so if the 5v line goes over a certain voltage it will either clamp or blow the fuse and protect the hard to fix surface mount chips.