BeRTOS Embedded Survey Summary 2011

1,918 views

Published on

"Microcontroller firmware development and embedded RTOS" is an initiative that analyses and registers behaviours in the embedded world,
identifying the most used RTOS, working tools and the most popular trends in the market sector.

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,918
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
345
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
18
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

BeRTOS Embedded Survey Summary 2011

  1. 1. Microcontroller firmware development andembedded RTOS1. What microcontroller families have you used during the last year? Response Response Percent Count Atmel AVR 39,8% 37 NXP Cortex-M0 7,5% 7 Texas Instruments Stellaris 15,1% 14 Atmel XMega 15,1% 14 NXP Cortex-M3 17,2% 16 Atmel SAM3 5,4% 5 NXP Cortex-M4 1,1% 1 Atmel AVR32 9,7% 9 NXP ARM7 9,7% 9 PIC PIC10/12/16/18 17,2% 16 Atmel SAM7 9,7% 9 NXP ARM9 4,3% 4 PIC PIC24 5,4% 5 ST STM8 2,2% 2 PIC dsPIC 3,2% 3 Freescale HC08 5,4% 5 ST STM32 28,0% 26 PIC PIC32 9,7% 9 Freescale HC16 2,2% 2 ST STR7 0,0% 0 Freescale Kinetis 4,3% 4 ST STR9 3,2% 3 1 of 35
  2. 2. Freescale ColdFire 5,4% 5 Texas Instruments MSP430 12,9% 12 Other (please specify) 15,1% 14 answered question 93 skipped question 02. How often do you change microcontroller families? Response Response Percent Count About every project 28,0% 26 About once a year 11,8% 11 About once every 2 years 31,2% 29 About once every 5 years 19,4% 18 Other (please specify) 9,7% 9 answered question 93 skipped question 0 2 of 35
  3. 3. 3. How useful were the following sources of information when selecting amicrocontroller? Rating Response Not at all Slightly Very Extremely Average Count Internet research 2,2% (2) 8,7% (8) 53,3% (49) 35,9% (33) 3,23 92 Seminars 28,1% (25) 43,8% (39) 24,7% (22) 3,4% (3) 2,03 89 Advice from colleagues 14,6% (13) 41,6% (37) 32,6% (29) 11,2% (10) 2,40 89 Magazines 30,2% (26) 48,8% (42) 20,9% (18) 0,0% (0) 1,91 86 Newsletters 37,9% (33) 44,8% (39) 17,2% (15) 0,0% (0) 1,79 87 Other (please specify) 5 answered question 93 skipped question 04. What operating system do you primarily use for development? Response Response Percent Count Windows 68,8% 64 Mac 2,2% 2 Linux 26,9% 25 Other (please specify) 2,2% 2 answered question 93 skipped question 0 3 of 35
  4. 4. 5. Would you like to have development tools (compiler, debugger, IDE) which run ondifferent operating systems (Windows, Mac, Linux, etc...)? Response Response Percent Count I do not feel the need 20,4% 19Yes, it would be useful but is not 39,8% 37 essential Yes, it is a necessity 20,4% 19 I already use cross-platform tools 19,4% 18 Other (please specify) 0,0% 0 answered question 93 skipped question 06. Have you evaluated/used Open Source or Free Software development tools oroperating systems (compiler, debugger, IDE, RTOS, etc...)? Response Response Percent Count Yes 84,9% 79 No 15,1% 14 answered question 93 skipped question 0 4 of 35
  5. 5. 7. How much do you agree with the following statements applied to Open Source andFree Software development tools? Strongly Strongly Rating Response Disagree Agree Disagree Agree Average Count No technical support 10,4% (7) 47,8% (32) 31,3% (21) 10,4% (7) 2,42 67 Great community support 0,0% (0) 11,9% (8) 59,7% (40) 28,4% (19) 3,16 67 Incomplete/insufficient 10,4% (7) 40,3% (27) 41,8% (28) 7,5% (5) 2,46 67 documentation Lower quality than commercial 27,3% (18) 47,0% (31) 25,8% (17) 0,0% (0) 1,98 66 alternatives There are hidden costs 13,4% (9) 32,8% (22) 44,8% (30) 9,0% (6) 2,49 67 Free of charge 2,9% (2) 10,3% (7) 42,6% (29) 44,1% (30) 3,28 68 Open Source and Free Softwarephilosophies are valid in a business 1,5% (1) 10,4% (7) 59,7% (40) 28,4% (19) 3,15 67 context No vendor lock in 0,0% (0) 10,6% (7) 53,0% (35) 36,4% (24) 3,26 66 Source code availability 0,0% (0) 4,4% (3) 32,4% (22) 63,2% (43) 3,59 68 Difficult to use 9,1% (6) 51,5% (34) 37,9% (25) 1,5% (1) 2,32 66 Other (please specify) 4 answered question 68 skipped question 25 5 of 35
  6. 6. 8. What development tools (compiler, IDE, debugger) have you used during the last year? Response Response Percent Count Codewarrior 11,3% 9 Code Composer 16,3% 13 Code Red 3,8% 3 Codesourcery 23,8% 19 GCC + custom IDE (Eclipse, 70,0% 56 etc...) IAR 23,8% 19 Keil 18,8% 15 Rowley 6,3% 5 AVR Studio 33,8% 27 MPLAB 26,3% 21 BeRTOS SDK 6,3% 5 Other (please specify) 23,8% 19 answered question 80 skipped question 13 6 of 35
  7. 7. 9. How often do you change your development tools (compiler, IDE, debugger)? Response Response Percent Count Once every project 25,0% 20 Once every year 3,8% 3 Once every 2 years 33,8% 27 Once every 5 years 21,3% 17 Other (please specify) 16,3% 13 answered question 80 skipped question 1310. How useful were the following sources of information when selecting a developmenttool? Rating Response Not at all Slightly Very Extremely Average Count Internet research 2,5% (2) 15,2% (12) 45,6% (36) 36,7% (29) 3,16 79 Seminars 39,5% (30) 35,5% (27) 19,7% (15) 5,3% (4) 1,91 76 Advice from colleagues 23,1% (18) 37,2% (29) 34,6% (27) 5,1% (4) 2,22 78Included in the demoboard software 19,0% (15) 27,8% (22) 39,2% (31) 13,9% (11) 2,48 79 pack Directly supplied by the 17,5% (14) 18,8% (15) 40,0% (32) 23,8% (19) 2,70 80 microcontroller manufacturer Magazines 40,3% (31) 44,2% (34) 15,6% (12) 0,0% (0) 1,75 77 Newsletters 47,4% (37) 39,7% (31) 10,3% (8) 2,6% (2) 1,68 78 Other (please specify) 1 answered question 80 skipped question 13 7 of 35
  8. 8. 11. What was important when you selected the development tools (compiler, IDE,debugger) Not at all Slightly Very Extremely Rating Response important important important important Average Count Number of integrated features (flasher, step-by-step debugger, 2,5% (2) 19,0% (15) 49,4% (39) 29,1% (23) 3,05 79 etc...) Wizards for project 27,3% (21) 45,5% (35) 19,5% (15) 7,8% (6) 2,08 77 creation/maintenance Integrated libraries (network stack, 10,3% (8) 26,9% (21) 38,5% (30) 24,4% (19) 2,77 78 USB, FAT, GUI, etc...) Integration with RTOS 21,8% (17) 35,9% (28) 32,1% (25) 10,3% (8) 2,31 78 Suggested/supplied by the 19,5% (15) 35,1% (27) 35,1% (27) 10,4% (8) 2,36 77 microcontroller manufacturer Number of supported 10,3% (8) 24,4% (19) 41,0% (32) 24,4% (19) 2,79 78 microcontrollersPerformance and memory usage of 2,6% (2) 29,5% (23) 43,6% (34) 24,4% (19) 2,90 78 compiled code Price 2,5% (2) 26,3% (21) 41,3% (33) 30,0% (24) 2,99 80 Open Source 13,9% (11) 35,4% (28) 29,1% (23) 21,5% (17) 2,58 79 Technical support 9,1% (7) 37,7% (29) 39,0% (30) 14,3% (11) 2,58 77 Diffusion/reputation 5,1% (4) 34,2% (27) 46,8% (37) 13,9% (11) 2,70 79Was the only available/Imposed by 31,6% (25) 34,2% (27) 24,1% (19) 10,1% (8) 2,13 79 the manufacturer Other (please specify) 2 answered question 80 skipped question 13 8 of 35
  9. 9. 12. Do you know at least one embedded real time operating system (RTOS)? Response Response Percent Count Yes 78,8% 63 No 21,3% 17 answered question 80 skipped question 13 9 of 35
  10. 10. 13. Regarding embedded RTOSes, please rate how strongly you agree or disagree withthe following statements: Strongly Strongly Rating Response Disagree Agree disagree Agree Average Count They are too complex for my 13,8% (8) 53,4% (31) 29,3% (17) 3,4% (2) 2,22 58 typical applicationsThey let me dedicate my efforts to the application, ignoring the low 0,0% (0) 20,7% (12) 63,8% (37) 15,5% (9) 2,95 58 level part They are not integrated into the 5,3% (3) 38,6% (22) 43,9% (25) 12,3% (7) 2,63 57 development tools I use They are too expensive 12,3% (7) 54,4% (31) 26,3% (15) 7,0% (4) 2,28 57 They do not support enough 8,6% (5) 51,7% (30) 34,5% (20) 5,2% (3) 2,36 58 microcontrollers They speed up development 0,0% (0) 13,8% (8) 62,1% (36) 24,1% (14) 3,10 58 They are difficult to use 10,3% (6) 48,3% (28) 39,7% (23) 1,7% (1) 2,33 58 They are essential for complex 1,7% (1) 13,8% (8) 56,9% (33) 27,6% (16) 3,10 58 applications They ease debugging 12,1% (7) 41,4% (24) 37,9% (22) 8,6% (5) 2,43 58 They should supply more features/libraries (driver, GUI, 3,5% (2) 21,1% (12) 52,6% (30) 22,8% (13) 2,95 57 network, etc...) Other (please specify) 1 answered question 58 skipped question 35 10 of 35
  11. 11. 14. Have you used at least one embedded RTOS during last year? Response Response Percent Count Yes 86,2% 50 No 13,8% 8 answered question 58 skipped question 35 11 of 35
  12. 12. 15. What embedded RTOS(es) have you used during last year? Response Response Percent Count FreeRTOS 68,1% 32 BeRTOS 21,3% 10 RTX (Keil) 4,3% 2 MQX 0,0% 0 embOS 4,3% 2 eCos 6,4% 3 LynxOS 0,0% 0 Neutrino 6,4% 3 Nucleus OS 2,1% 1 NuttX RTOS 6,4% 3 SCIOPTA 0,0% 0 Salvo 2,1% 1 RTXC Quadros 0,0% 0 RTEMS 4,3% 2 µC/OS-II 29,8% 14 VxWorks 8,5% 4 ThreadX 4,3% 2 Other (please specify) 18 answered question 47 skipped question 46 12 of 35
  13. 13. 16. How useful were the following sources of information when selecting a RTOS? Rating Response Not at all Slightly Very Extremely Average Count Internet research 2,1% (1) 19,1% (9) 40,4% (19) 38,3% (18) 3,15 47 Seminars 42,2% (19) 35,6% (16) 20,0% (9) 2,2% (1) 1,82 45 Advice from colleagues 25,5% (12) 38,3% (18) 34,0% (16) 2,1% (1) 2,13 47 Magazines 41,3% (19) 50,0% (23) 8,7% (4) 0,0% (0) 1,67 46 Newsletters 48,9% (23) 38,3% (18) 10,6% (5) 2,1% (1) 1,66 47 Included in demoboard software 25,5% (12) 46,8% (22) 23,4% (11) 4,3% (2) 2,06 47 pack Included in the compiler/IDE 29,8% (14) 25,5% (12) 36,2% (17) 8,5% (4) 2,23 47 Supplied by the microcontroller 23,3% (10) 37,2% (16) 25,6% (11) 14,0% (6) 2,30 43 manufacturer Other (please specify) 1 answered question 47 skipped question 46 13 of 35
  14. 14. 17. What was important when you selected the RTOS? Not at all Slightly Very Extremely Rating Response important important important important Average Count Number of kernel features 0,0% (0) 23,4% (11) 70,2% (33) 6,4% (3) 2,83 47 Additional libraries (driver, GUI, 6,4% (3) 31,9% (15) 40,4% (19) 21,3% (10) 2,77 47 network stack, FAT, etc...) Diffusion/reputation 2,1% (1) 38,3% (18) 42,6% (20) 17,0% (8) 2,74 47 Real time performance 2,1% (1) 14,9% (7) 61,7% (29) 21,3% (10) 3,02 47 Low memory footprint 0,0% (0) 21,3% (10) 57,4% (27) 21,3% (10) 3,00 47 Documentation 0,0% (0) 10,6% (5) 44,7% (21) 44,7% (21) 3,34 47 Technical support 0,0% (0) 34,0% (16) 51,1% (24) 14,9% (7) 2,81 47 Development tools integration 10,9% (5) 23,9% (11) 47,8% (22) 17,4% (8) 2,72 46 Directly supplied in bundle by the 29,8% (14) 34,0% (16) 25,5% (12) 10,6% (5) 2,17 47 CPU/board manufacturer Supported microcontrollers 0,0% (0) 23,4% (11) 46,8% (22) 29,8% (14) 3,06 47 Open Source 4,3% (2) 23,9% (11) 32,6% (15) 39,1% (18) 3,07 46 Price 2,1% (1) 27,7% (13) 38,3% (18) 31,9% (15) 3,00 47Was the only available/Imposed by 37,0% (17) 37,0% (17) 21,7% (10) 4,3% (2) 1,93 46 the manufacturer Other (please specify) 1 answered question 47 skipped question 46 14 of 35
  15. 15. 18. What percentage of your firmware development time do you spend working onperipheral drivers (serial, ADC, PWM, I2C, etc...)? Response Response Percent Count 5% 4,2% 3 10% 11,3% 8 20% 35,2% 25 40% 39,4% 28 80% 9,9% 7 Other (please specify) 1 answered question 71 skipped question 22 15 of 35
  16. 16. 19. During your last year projects, where did you get the drivers for your peripherals(serials, ADC, PWM, I2C, etc...)? Response Response Percent Count I wrote them from scratch 69,0% 49 I already had previous code 62,0% 44 developed for other projects They were supplied by the microcontroller/demoboard 47,9% 34 manufacturer Purchased on the Internet 8,5% 6 Downloaded for free from the 45,1% 32 Internet Already integrated in my RTOS 29,6% 21 Already integrated in my 23,9% 17 compiler/IDE Other (please specify) 0,0% 0 answered question 71 skipped question 2220. During your last year projects, did you have to modify/adapt the drivers? Response Response Percent Count Not at all 18,2% 4 Slightly 63,6% 14 Very much 18,2% 4 Other (please specify) 0,0% 0 answered question 22 skipped question 71 16 of 35
  17. 17. 21. During last year, have you evaluated third party high level libraries (GUI, protocols, filesystems, multimedia, USB, TCP/IP, etc...) for firmware development? Response Response Percent Count Yes 57,1% 40 No 42,9% 30 answered question 70 skipped question 2322. During last year, what high level libraries have you evaluated? Response Count 39 answered question 39 skipped question 54 17 of 35
  18. 18. 23. How useful were the following sources of information when selecting a library forevaluation? Rating Response Not at all Slightly Very Extremely Average Count Internet research 2,6% (1) 12,8% (5) 51,3% (20) 33,3% (13) 3,15 39 Seminars 43,2% (16) 29,7% (11) 24,3% (9) 2,7% (1) 1,86 37 Advice from colleagues 29,7% (11) 27,0% (10) 37,8% (14) 5,4% (2) 2,19 37 Magazines 37,8% (14) 51,4% (19) 10,8% (4) 0,0% (0) 1,73 37 Newsletters 45,9% (17) 45,9% (17) 8,1% (3) 0,0% (0) 1,62 37 Included in demoboard software 21,6% (8) 27,0% (10) 45,9% (17) 5,4% (2) 2,35 37 pack Included in the compiler/IDE 21,6% (8) 27,0% (10) 45,9% (17) 5,4% (2) 2,35 37 Supplied by the microcontroller 18,9% (7) 24,3% (9) 35,1% (13) 21,6% (8) 2,59 37 manufacturer Other (please specify) 0 answered question 39 skipped question 5424. During last year, have you used/purchased a third party high level library? Response Response Percent Count Yes 38,5% 15 No 61,5% 24 answered question 39 skipped question 54 18 of 35
  19. 19. 25. During last year, why did you not use/purchase the third party libraries youevaluated? Response Response Percent Count I did not really need them 44,0% 11They were too complex to integrate 12,0% 3 Price 48,0% 12I did not find what I was looking for 36,0% 9 They were incomplete 16,0% 4 Other (please specify) 1 answered question 25 skipped question 6826. During last year, what third party high level library have you purchased/used? Response Count 15 answered question 15 skipped question 78 19 of 35
  20. 20. 27. What do you think about the software that comes with a microcontrollerdevelopment board (examples, libraries, compilers, RTOSes, etc...)? Response Response Percent Count It is fundamental for development: in this way you 53,6% 37 can save time starting from something already done It is only a demo: firmware development tools are evaluated 39,1% 27and choosed separately in order tofind the best solution on the market Other (please specify) 7,2% 5 answered question 69 skipped question 2428. Where are you from? Response Response Percent Count Europe 59,4% 41 North America 13,0% 9 South America 5,8% 4 Africa 1,4% 1 Middle-East 1,4% 1 Asia 17,4% 12 Australia 1,4% 1 answered question 69 skipped question 24 20 of 35
  21. 21. 29. Which sectors do you develop solutions for? Response Response Percent Count Industrial 59,4% 41 Medical 14,5% 10 Automotive/Transport 24,6% 17 Aerospace/Defense 11,6% 8 Telecommunications 21,7% 15 Consumer 26,1% 18 Energy/Lightning 24,6% 17 Other (please specify) 13,0% 9 answered question 69 skipped question 2430. Would you like to share your thoughts and opinions on this survey? Please writethem here! Response Count 8 answered question 8 skipped question 85 21 of 35
  22. 22. Page 1, Q1. What microcontroller families have you used during the last year? 1 TI C2000, Renesas SH2A Feb 6, 2012 1:04 AM 2 Renesas R8C, RX62 Jan 8, 2012 3:09 AM 3 Freescale 56F83xxxx Jan 4, 2012 5:58 AM 4 ST ST10 Dec 29, 2011 11:05 AM 5 Freescale HC(S)12 Dec 15, 2011 4:32 PM 6 Freescale iMX25, iMX51 Dec 15, 2011 7:49 AM 7 Freescale S12XE Dec 15, 2011 2:15 AM 8 Silicon Labs 8051F120 Dec 13, 2011 1:45 PM 9 STM Cortex M3 Dec 13, 2011 9:44 AM 10 mpc5121 Dec 13, 2011 4:05 AM 11 Silicon Labs 80C51F120/F350 Dec 12, 2011 2:55 PM 12 rabbit, Nec 78K0 Dec 12, 2011 10:56 AM 13 Lattice Mico32 Dec 12, 2011 9:40 AM 14 Freescale i.MX Dec 12, 2011 9:38 AM 22 of 35
  23. 23. Page 1, Q2. How often do you change microcontroller families? 1 Only for compelling competitive advantage Mar 25, 2012 5:38 AM 2 never Dec 19, 2011 10:41 AM 3 never Dec 15, 2011 3:01 AM 4 Customer requests Dec 15, 2011 1:34 AM 5 secondo le necessita specifiche Dec 13, 2011 9:54 AM 6 almost never Dec 13, 2011 7:11 AM 7 Depending on the project the microcontroller is used in Dec 13, 2011 6:28 AM 8 dipende dalle applicazioni,cliente... Dec 13, 2011 4:05 AM 9 When needed by designs constraint Dec 12, 2011 10:55 PMPage 1, Q3. How useful were the following sources of information when selecting a microcontroller? 1 Forum, newsgroup Jan 4, 2012 5:58 AM 2 Books and manufacturers data sheets Dec 20, 2011 8:38 AM 3 Personal experience and inclination Dec 12, 2011 10:55 PM 4 previous work with same controller Dec 12, 2011 2:55 PM 5 Datasheets Dec 12, 2011 9:38 AMPage 1, Q4. What operating system do you primarily use for development? 1 FreeRTOS Dec 14, 2011 11:08 AM 2 Java Dec 14, 2011 1:16 AMPage 2, Q7. How much do you agree with the following statements applied to Open Source and Free Softwaredevelopment tools? 1 there is the risk the sofware is discontinued (no more manteined by the Dec 19, 2011 6:49 AM developpers team) 2 Lots of good but no longer maintained projects (unfortunately) Dec 13, 2011 10:03 PM 3 You miss the "it depends" answer. Dec 12, 2011 10:58 PM 23 of 35
  24. 24. Page 2, Q7. How much do you agree with the following statements applied to Open Source and Free Softwaredevelopment tools? 4 easy to develop on Dec 12, 2011 11:00 AM 24 of 35
  25. 25. 25 of 35
  26. 26. Page 2, Q8. What development tools (compiler, IDE, debugger) have you used during the last year? 1 + WinAVR Mar 25, 2012 1:01 PM 2 Intel ASM & Borland C/C++ & Microsoft C/C+ Mar 25, 2012 5:43 AM 3 HEW Feb 6, 2012 1:08 AM 4 Arduino Jan 18, 2012 5:07 AM 5 lpcxpresso Jan 14, 2012 9:57 AM 6 E-Lab AVRCo Pascal compiler Dec 20, 2011 8:44 AM 7 SwiftX Dec 15, 2011 4:33 PM 8 CodeLite Dec 15, 2011 6:16 AM 9 BASCOM-AVR Dec 15, 2011 3:03 AM 10 LPCXpresso Dec 14, 2011 11:13 AM 11 www.mikroe.com tools Dec 13, 2011 8:23 PM 12 Xilinx XPS Dec 13, 2011 3:14 PM 13 SIlicon Labs IDE Dec 13, 2011 1:49 PM 14 Eclipse CDT Dec 12, 2011 3:42 PM 15 SDCC, Silabs IDE Dec 12, 2011 2:59 PM 16 Eclipse, Visual Studio Dec 12, 2011 12:46 PM 17 command line tools under Linux Dec 12, 2011 11:00 AM 18 Eclipse Dec 12, 2011 9:43 AM 19 CodeBlocks, Eclipse Dec 12, 2011 6:56 AM 26 of 35
  27. 27. Page 2, Q9. How often do you change your development tools (compiler, IDE, debugger)? 1 Only for compelling advantage Mar 25, 2012 5:43 AM 2 newbie Jan 18, 2012 5:07 AM 3 Depends on controller change Jan 14, 2012 9:57 AM 4 As little as required Dec 20, 2011 8:44 AM 5 never Dec 19, 2011 10:44 AM 6 never Dec 15, 2011 3:03 AM 7 secondo necessita Dec 13, 2011 9:57 AM 8 almost never Dec 13, 2011 7:13 AM 9 As little as possible Dec 13, 2011 6:31 AM 10 alla bisogna Dec 13, 2011 4:08 AM 11 When needed by design constraint. Dec 12, 2011 10:58 PM 12 depends, there is no time-schedule. As soon as a new processor is chosen Dec 12, 2011 11:00 AM or a new need arise 13 when meeting blocking/inconvenient issue during development Dec 12, 2011 6:56 AMPage 2, Q10. How useful were the following sources of information when selecting a development tool? 1 Downloadable demo programmes Dec 20, 2011 8:44 AMPage 2, Q11. What was important when you selected the development tools (compiler, IDE, debugger) 1 cross platform + integration with software workflow tools (like git/subversion, Dec 13, 2011 10:03 PM etc) 2 If it imposed by manufacturer Im looking for another mcu family. Dec 12, 2011 10:58 PMPage 3, Q13. Regarding embedded RTOSes, please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with thefollowing statements: 1 the penultimate question has a point. An RTOS should ease the developing Dec 12, 2011 11:01 AM 27 of 35
  28. 28. Page 3, Q13. Regarding embedded RTOSes, please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with thefollowing statements: process 28 of 35
  29. 29. Page 4, Q15. What embedded RTOS(es) have you used during last year? 1 pthreads libraries Mar 25, 2012 5:46 AM 2 coos Mar 15, 2012 12:09 PM 3 RT-Threads Feb 13, 2012 4:37 AM 4 TinyOS, Contiki Feb 2, 2012 11:03 PM 5 ChibiOS (only, This question requires an answer...) Feb 2, 2012 3:46 AM 6 ChibiOS/RT Dec 27, 2011 11:23 AM 7 avrx Dec 20, 2011 2:25 AM 8 Dr. TAKs and AvrX Dec 14, 2011 8:30 AM 9 QNX Dec 13, 2011 3:17 PM 10 Micronet CMX Dec 13, 2011 1:53 PM 11 CMX Dec 13, 2011 11:52 AM 12 CCS RTOS Dec 13, 2011 7:15 AM 13 rt_thread Dec 12, 2011 8:36 PM 14 not really RTOS: Protothreads Dec 12, 2011 12:50 PM 15 DSP/BIOS Dec 12, 2011 11:20 AM 16 RTL Dec 12, 2011 11:03 AM 17 ERIKA Enterprise Dec 12, 2011 9:45 AM 18 ChibiOS Dec 12, 2011 5:27 AMPage 4, Q16. How useful were the following sources of information when selecting a RTOS? 1 History of usage Feb 20, 2012 8:03 AMPage 4, Q17. What was important when you selected the RTOS? 1 Code Quality! Feb 2, 2012 3:46 AMPage 5, Q18. What percentage of your firmware development time do you spend working on peripheraldrivers (serial, ADC, PWM, I2C, etc...)? 1 60% Dec 16, 2011 3:31 PM 29 of 35
  30. 30. Page 5, Q18. What percentage of your firmware development time do you spend working on peripheraldrivers (serial, ADC, PWM, I2C, etc...)? 30 of 35
  31. 31. 31 of 35
  32. 32. Page 7, Q22. During last year, what high level libraries have you evaluated? 1 CodeVision AVR & Graphics Library & RTOS Mar 25, 2012 5:48 AM 2 too many to list Mar 19, 2012 8:54 PM 3 lwip Mar 15, 2012 12:11 PM 4 IRDA stack. USB stacks Feb 20, 2012 8:04 AM 5 GUI,Tcp/ip ,File systems Feb 13, 2012 4:40 AM 6 TCP/IP Feb 6, 2012 1:11 AM 7 lwip Feb 2, 2012 11:05 PM 8 lwIP, fatfs Feb 2, 2012 3:47 AM 9 canopen, tcpip, usb, etc Jan 24, 2012 11:23 AM 10 uip tcp/ip,microchip graphics Jan 14, 2012 10:03 AM 11 Processor Exper for Freescale Jan 6, 2012 1:29 PM 12 CanFestival Freemodbus Jan 3, 2012 4:03 PM 13 lpcusb, lwip, FATfs Jan 2, 2012 4:06 AM 14 LUFA-Lib USB Stack Dec 29, 2011 11:11 AM 15 RAMTEX GRAPHIC LCD LIBRARIES Dec 27, 2011 11:25 AM 16 C32 Dec 27, 2011 10:16 AM 17 USB ADC RTOS TCP IP FAT Dec 21, 2011 7:05 AM 18 N/A Dec 20, 2011 10:00 AM 19 AVRCo Dec 20, 2011 8:51 AM 20 none Dec 19, 2011 6:50 AM 21 TCP/IP, Filesystem Dec 17, 2011 12:35 AM 22 FAT16 Dec 16, 2011 3:34 PM 23 CAN driver Dec 15, 2011 2:28 AM 24 AVR Dec 14, 2011 3:55 PM 25 gui mcapi Dec 14, 2011 1:35 PM 26 LwIP Dec 14, 2011 12:22 PM 27 TFT LCD Graphics Library, IEEE 802.15.4 Stack Dec 14, 2011 11:18 AM 28 Pascal Stangs Procyon AVRlib library; various libs and examples from Dec 14, 2011 9:18 AM AvrFreaks 29 Qt Dec 13, 2011 1:17 PM 32 of 35
  33. 33. Page 7, Q22. During last year, what high level libraries have you evaluated? 30 Renesas Dec 13, 2011 11:53 AM 31 FatFS from ELM Chan Dec 13, 2011 9:59 AM 32 FatFas,USB Dec 13, 2011 9:49 AM 33 ethernet stack from microchip Dec 13, 2011 7:16 AM 34 TCP/IP/USB Dec 13, 2011 4:13 AM 35 TCP/IP Dec 13, 2011 1:40 AM 36 uIP Dec 13, 2011 12:44 AM 37 uC/GUI Dec 12, 2011 8:38 PM 38 FAT, soft USB Dec 12, 2011 11:04 AM 39 USB Device stack USB mini-Host stack Graphics/GUI Wireless Dec 12, 2011 7:03 AMPage 8, Q25. During last year, why did you not use/purchase the third party libraries you evaluated? 1 non ho scartato librerie Dec 13, 2011 10:00 AM 33 of 35
  34. 34. Page 9, Q26. During last year, what third party high level library have you purchased/used? 1 CodeVisionAVR subscription & new Graphics Library Mar 25, 2012 5:49 AM 2 lwip Mar 15, 2012 12:11 PM 3 IRPRO Feb 20, 2012 8:04 AM 4 gui,tcp/ip,filesystem Feb 13, 2012 4:41 AM 5 lwip Feb 6, 2012 1:11 AM 6 lwip Feb 2, 2012 11:05 PM 7 lwip, fatfs Feb 2, 2012 3:47 AM 8 canopen Jan 24, 2012 11:24 AM 9 Processor Expert Jan 6, 2012 1:29 PM 10 LUFA-Lib USB Stack Dec 29, 2011 11:12 AM 11 LwIP Dec 14, 2011 12:22 PM 12 FatFs,USB Dec 13, 2011 9:49 AM 13 TCP/IP,USB Dec 13, 2011 4:13 AM 14 uIP Dec 13, 2011 12:44 AM 15 uIP Dec 12, 2011 11:04 AMPage 10, Q27. What do you think about the software that comes with a microcontroller development board(examples, libraries, compilers, RTOSes, etc...)? 1 Bundled software does not integrate well with RTOS, often has many bugs. Feb 20, 2012 8:05 AM Not to be trusted. Used only as a general idea as to what to do. 2 boh?? Jan 18, 2012 5:08 AM 3 it is a demo which saves time, software which is "know-to-work", not only Dec 14, 2011 9:23 AM software authors but also board author thinks the software is worthy 4 depends... Dec 12, 2011 3:01 PM 5 good reference, parts can be used for integration in own software Dec 12, 2011 12:52 PM 34 of 35
  35. 35. Page 11, Q29. Which sectors do you develop solutions for? 1 Home appliances Jan 8, 2012 3:18 AM 2 private use, learning Dec 19, 2011 6:52 AM 3 Internet Information Providers Dec 16, 2011 3:36 PM 4 Hobbysts Dec 15, 2011 6:20 AM 5 hobby Dec 14, 2011 9:24 AM 6 academic, research Dec 13, 2011 3:19 PM 7 Engineering Education Dec 13, 2011 1:54 PM 8 Universita / Ricerca Dec 13, 2011 10:02 AM 9 remote sensing Dec 12, 2011 11:05 AMPage 11, Q30. Would you like to share your thoughts and opinions on this survey? Please write them here! 1 interesing Jan 14, 2012 10:05 AM 2 Well structured; very effective and appropriate questions. Jan 8, 2012 3:18 AM 3 Supply as many demo applications as you can using different Dec 27, 2011 11:28 AM microcontrollers peripherals. This way, it is easy to evaluate your tool. 4 all in this survey was perfect question. smart... i need see conclution about Dec 21, 2011 7:09 AM this survey. Nice survey 5 ya.its good to analysis & to know more about the future requirement Dec 16, 2011 12:09 PM 6 Not good Dec 15, 2011 2:30 AM 7 Sometimes I would have liked to tick "not applicable" as the item was "not Dec 13, 2011 10:13 PM applicable". Unfortunately this option was not present. 8 Once you start using the tool in your project. It wont be easy to switch tool Dec 12, 2011 8:42 PM even the tool is not very good. So I think provide the IDE/SDK + Demo board to user is a good strategy. 35 of 35

×