Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

Let Sim Innovations know about your Air Manager experience and let us know about your dream feature addition

Moderators: russ, Ralph

Message
Author
User avatar
jph
Posts: 2846
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:50 pm
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow..

Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#1 Post by jph »

Hi,
At the moment the PICO is limited to 16 'channels' PICO 'A', 'B' etc..
Can this be changed so as to allow far more. For example - PICO A1, A2, A3 etc ... or some other naming convention to allow total flexibility and virtually unlimited numbers.
A limit of 16 is soon going to become unworkable I believe as the now very limited and VERY expensive (and rapidly getting more expensive due to so few FAB plants willing to make the old units) 'nano' and 'mega' are replaced in new designs with the far, far cheaper and more flexible PICO. The benefits of HID as opposed to serial are also huge. I see no reason why the number of HID PICOs should be a problem. Please can we come up with a differing naming convention that offers virtually unlimited numbers ?.

I can buy 5 genuine picos for the price of a nano, and 10 pico for the price of a mega at the arduno store. 133mhz dual core - (capable of 240MHz), 26 I/O, fully featured, 2MB Flash and 264KB SRam and direct HID connection.

Also, a small issue - the PICO pin selection in the hardware pull down menus still contains the non available pins 23,24,25,29, Could they please be removed ?.
Thanks Corjan / Ralph
Joe
Joe. CISSP, MSc.

User avatar
Ralph
Posts: 7878
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:02 pm
Location: De Steeg
Contact:

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#2 Post by Ralph »

The Pico pins are on the to do list for the next update.

I've never heard of someone running into the limit of 16 devices of the same type :) You can for example add a Raspberry Pi to the setup, then you can connect another 16.

User avatar
jph
Posts: 2846
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:50 pm
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow..

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#3 Post by jph »

Ralph wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 12:28 pm The Pico pins are on the to do list for the next update.

I've never heard of someone running into the limit of 16 devices of the same type :) You can for example add a Raspberry Pi to the setup, then you can connect another 16.
Herein lies the problem though ;) .
Why would you want to add another 'type' ?

If I wanted I/O - like I do - on a new complex project then I would use PICO for ALL I/O. I wouldn't dream of using use arduino of any type at all due to price and limitations (and certainly not a regular unobtanium solid gold priced PI :o ) - I dont understand why, on a new build, anyone would with the way the prices have gone. I would be buying a far more expensive and less capable device to simply allow an extra block of devices if you see what I mean.

Joe
Joe. CISSP, MSc.

User avatar
Ralph
Posts: 7878
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:02 pm
Location: De Steeg
Contact:

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#4 Post by Ralph »

Then the quickest solution would be to add for example a Raspberry Pi, or nowadays, you can also use something like an Odroid.

User avatar
jph
Posts: 2846
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:50 pm
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow..

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#5 Post by jph »

Have you seen the price recently Ralph ? check the price for a PI - :shock:
I can get a PICO for just over 4 euros. 2 picos will do more than a full blown PI or a mega. There simply is no comparison.
Joe
Joe. CISSP, MSc.

User avatar
Ralph
Posts: 7878
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:02 pm
Location: De Steeg
Contact:

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#6 Post by Ralph »

Maybe an Odroid then. It doesn't have to be powerful if it is only taking care of the Pico hardware. As long as it can run Air Player ARM. Or something similar with an ARM CPU, Banana Pi, Orange Pi, etc...

User avatar
jph
Posts: 2846
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:50 pm
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow..

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#7 Post by jph »

Ralph wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:13 pm Maybe an Odroid then. It doesn't have to be powerful if it is only taking care of the Pico hardware. As long as it can run Air Player ARM. Or something similar with an ARM CPU, Banana Pi, Orange Pi, etc...
Oh, I see what you mean. you mean as an AP device. Roger !- understood now. Yes, that would help - but - do they support HID ? - the PICOs are all HID, not yukky serial which is another reason they are so damn good. :)
Joe. CISSP, MSc.

User avatar
jph
Posts: 2846
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:50 pm
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow..

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#8 Post by jph »

To be honest, any AP device (apart from curiosity testing) I would use a PC. I can get a PC with quad output GPU for about 120 to 150 euros max - complete.
Joe. CISSP, MSc.

User avatar
jph
Posts: 2846
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:50 pm
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow..

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#9 Post by jph »

Ralph wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:13 pm Maybe an Odroid then. It doesn't have to be powerful if it is only taking care of the Pico hardware. As long as it can run Air Player ARM. Or something similar with an ARM CPU, Banana Pi, Orange Pi, etc...
Hi Ralph,
Just to check... Are you saying the above as AP will run HID devices such as a PICO / CDC (which is how AM communicates with PICO) ? :shock:
Joe
Joe. CISSP, MSc.

User avatar
Ralph
Posts: 7878
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:02 pm
Location: De Steeg
Contact:

Re: Pi PICO naming convention needs extending ?

#10 Post by Ralph »

I've never tested it, so I'm not sure... If you have a Pi somewhere, then it would be a matter of connecting it all.

Post Reply