ABBUC hardwarecontest 2018

[Mathy]

Hello Freetz

 

I'm glad you prove Mathy's statement wrong that supposedly no PCB layout was submitted.

 

Where did I say that?

 

Mathy

Edited October 30, 2018 by Mathy

[freetz]

CharlyChaplin wrote:

"they wrote in the magazine that some details (e.g. schematics/plans) were missing, while they got these details" (the PCB was mentioned there as missing, in addition to the low quality schematics)

to which you replied:

"I was there, spoke to some of the people in the jury, the docs were incomplete and some if it looked like a photo copy of a photo copy of a photo copy of"

What else - if not the supposedly missing PCB mentioned in the magazine - were you referring to regarding to "incomplete" docs?

By the way, I still would like to know how my submitted device was different from what I presented at the JHV?

[Mathy]

Helo Freetz

 

I was referring to the docs that were incomplete. You said "Mathy's statement". I never stated that the schematics/plans/PCB were missing, I just said that the docs were incomplete.

 

Mathy

[freetz]

Incomplete means that something is missing. What was criticized as missing was the PCB layout. The description/docs were said to be "not detailed" enough. But nevermind, my apologies if I insinuated something that was not what you intended to say.

[foft]

I don't want to detract form the rules discussion etc. I just wanted to pop in to say:

 

• Many thanks for running the hardware contest. It has encouraged many great designs over the years. I am always excited to see/try the entries. Please do keep running it!
• Many thanks for recognising the effort that went into pokeymax and the other entries.

 

Now, back to working on/playing with some other designs...

[Level42]

 

 

 

This project was submitted as "final product". In my opinion, it would be very unfair to PokeyMax and AntiX (and to all other "final products" in the past) to accept this. Since circuit and shematic are parts of registration, it was for no one a problem to give this essential documents. Both PokeyMax and AntiX comes along with detailed, comprehensive documentation, and ATARIduinos docs are simply not on the same level and not conformal with rules. So it was classified as "in development" to give the chance to improve the mentioned parts and do a second try as "final product".

 

....and finally won the same amount of money as AntiX....which is not exactly fair IMHO. AntiX was ready, a working unit delivered, all documents exactly delivered as required, a very detailed write-up done, good photos delivered (which weren't used, another....rather poor picture, was used in the magazine...why ?) even videos with demonstration of the product are available online and handed over to the ABBUC.

 

I had AntiX in development end 2017 but never thought about submitting it because I did not understand it was allowed to enter both, under development in one year, and "ready product" the next year ! At least I thought a prize (Note PriZe) won for "in development" would be deducted from a prize won when the same product entered in the "final product" contest....that would only feel fair to me... I would see the "in development" awards as an encouragement to get the product done...

 

Anyway, the current concept of "in development" and "ready" has two strange effects:

 

1) It gives an impulse to drag development so it can be submitted twice and win money twice. This could delay the availability of any product if a developer chooses this path.

2) If the developer estimates that his product will not have a big "market" because it's use is only useful for a very limited amount of A8 users (a niche market), this would be the way to go (competing twice) to get the most out of a project.

 

 

One more note about AtariDuino:

 

I talked with Freetz after the official part of the JHV.

 

I had not seen what documents he had submitted and thus I withheld from voting about his product. In essence I totally agree that the docs should be as specified in the rules and should be clear to read and understand for everyone.

However, I can also understand from Freetz the following:

The jury noticed docs were not clear, incomplete or whatever. Why didn't they send Freetz a message, or call him to ask for better docs ? There is plenty of time between Fujiyama and JHV to correct this. It would have saved a lot of frustration from both sides.

 

It is a little bit how I felt when I read that the test set-up of AntiX showed some jitter on the lower part of the screen. Why wait and write that in a magazine that is sent out to 450 or so members ? Why not simply give me a call (you had my number) or send an e-mail to notify me of it (send a picture how it looked) and I could maybe have done some suggestions.

Because now, 450 people _might _ think there _might_ be a problem with AntiX.

Yes I know the text already says it was likely the TV/monitor used but still.....does ABBUC really have only one monitor/TV to test such things. (apropos....it totally baffled me that the Pokeymax was not tested with Paddles because they were not available......I mean ....really ? 450 members and we can't arrange a set of paddles for some testing ? With the amount of money on the bank account of ABBUC they should have everyone's blessing to buy a set of (used) Paddles for something like 10-20 euro. I'm focusing on this because Paddle response is quite essential for games like Kaboom ! so this is one aspect of Pokeymax that is actually very important....but didn't get tested...

In the end, as in so many cases, communication is the key here.

 

Now....let me state that I think ABBUC is a great club of people, they do great things for the Atari community and I actually know what it is like to be in a commission or board of a club like that and get loads of criticism. It's not fun. And people do this voluntarily and for fun.

The other side of the medal is that a good board should always be open for positive and constructive feedback.

 

So....please let anything I've written be felt like that. I am not the kind of guy to go talking behind people's backs and since I think this is of concern to all ABBUC members and in fact all A8 users, I chose to communicate it on the forums. I have nothing to hide.

 

I understand it is impossible to please everyone because opinions differ and I accept that, but I hope ABBUC can further improve the contests so that people who have decided not to participate anymore will return, which will be beneficial for both the ABBUC, the contest and all A8 Users.

[Level42]

By the way AtariDuino.

 

What got totally snowed under by the discussion about the entry/documents is that the actual USE of AtariDuino was never really clearly explained.

 

I have started with Arduino's about a year ago so I understand the concept of what those cheap and great things can do.

What I don't see, not even after reading the article in the magazine, is what is the added value of connecting an Arduino to the Atari ?

Are you going to program the Arduino from the Atari ?

Will the Arduino work as a file server (a bit like Sdrive-Max) ? Will it provide f.i. RS-232 interfacing to a printer or something like that ?

[freetz]

I provided a 10 minute video in the text which shows the possible applications that can be done with AtariDuino (as a result of the feedback I got from last year's contest). It's in the magazine and also in the ABBUC forum, but in case it got under in the rest of the text:

 

It's an interface to the Arduino world. You can run it without an Arduino with "passive" shields (such as relay cards which can be had for a few bucks) and control these relays with 2 or 3 POKE commands, for example to control your model train.

Or you can access more sophisticated boards, such as sensor boards or the Ethernet shield throug which you can access the internet. This requires a small program on the Arduino (just a good dozen lines of code) and then the Atari can tell via the R: handler what website it wants to access (of course within the limitations of the memory of the Atari). Since the Arduino has only 32k of program memory and 2k of RAM, you could theoretically port the code and libraries used to the Atari as well and run also these more sophisticated shields without the Arduino. But that would be more a show of proof of concept because a similar distribution of workload is also done by peripherals such as the 1050 etc. which has its own processor.

 

At the JHV, the demo program which is shown on the video was also running and displayed the text of a small website and displayed the temperature of a sensor.

 

Whether this is useful to people probably depends on what you want to make with it and your Atari. Probably not, if you're a gamer. Then AntiX is definitively more useful. But I really like the "maker" scene and I'm into home automation and have two other projects where I pimped both my old heating system as well as my lawn robot to make them accessible via the internet and monitor/control them. So I thought it would be cool to do something similar with the Atari to show it could also do this stuff. I wrote a little program with which I can control my heating system (via the relay card) based on the room temperature (derived from the temperature sensor) and the outside temperature (retrieved from a website). It's just a couple of lines of BASIC code but in the end it does the same as much larger applications do as well.

 

It might be more interesting for a larger user base if the club really goes through with what Carsten outlined: That the new website and services should be accessible for the 8-Bit Atari as well. Then you could write a program on the Atari to access the club's portal with hardware that costs around 30 Euros in total.

 

It was (and still is) a bit difficult for me to see what kind of audience the docs should be gearing towards, especially as there is no single or unique use-case. As at least some programming knowledge is required, I went for documented code. For next year, I may write a little tutorial for one or two example use cases, but then again it's a question of where to begin and where to stop - could I assume that people using AtariDuino know how to flash a sketch on the Arduino? And if they know programming, would they understand basic C programming (required for programming the Arduino as well)? A lot of these things are already explained at lenght on the internet (and probably much better than I could ever do it).

It would probably be much easier if I would submit one unique plug-and-play application such as an "internet kit" where AtariDuino is a part of, where the code is already packed onto the Arduino and the full set is distributed as a whole. But I rather want people to be creative and think about their own ideas what you could now connect with the Atari and how - just what you do in the "maker" community. But maybe that clashes with the expectations of others, who want to have a "finished" product with a clearly defined use-case - which is also understandable.

[_The Doctor__]

Now that makes this real to me, I wish this was the write up I could have had first, then I could have drilled down on the other stuff. Thank you for the above posting!

As a prelude or introduction this should have been there.

Edited October 31, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[freetz]

Well, the first paragraph is more or less the gist of the longer text in the magazine, isn't it? But if the other paragraphs regarding my motivation or the usefulness make it easier to understand, then I'll put that in into next year's description .

[Mathy]

Hello Andre

 

Yes I know the text already says it was likely the TV/monitor used but still.....does ABBUC really have only one monitor/TV to test such things. (apropos....it totally baffled me that the Pokeymax was not tested with Paddles because they were not available......I mean ....really ?

 

That surprised me too. They could have tested it at the Fujiama. We had more then enough monitors present and some of us had paddles with us too.

 

BTW rule is that you submit everything you have to submit before the deadline. Anything submitted after the deadline is considered "to late".

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

Edited October 31, 2018 by Mathy

[Level42]

OK...true, there needs to be a deadline.

 

By the way, thanks for the support for AntiX !

The sad thing is that when someone votes against the suggested ranking by the jury, it is not clear wether one does that because he thinks the ranking it too low or too high

[+JAC!]

I

>Some people at the JHV thought that AntiX simply switched the 5V supply to the ANTIC chips!!!

Those people were me, and surely only me and personally apologized for this. Honestly, I held the PCB in my hands and didn't even even spot the (expected) multiplexer, because the PCB design is so compact/good. AntiX is a nice and useful product for games.

At the same time AtariDuino is great for DIY fans.

And the Power Meter (yet, it is not finished, therefore is was in the different category), may seem totally strange at first glance. But there is more to it than just some LEDs and I have seen it in action. It would be absolutely great for events and presentation display to attract people.

Many people said we have to change the way this works. So I have a lot of time thinking, and here's my result.

 

Regarding the jury system:

====================

It was the decision of the ABBUC members some years to try that because some people said hardware is to hard to judge by themselves. While you can try out software upfront from the disk mag, you cannot do that with the hardware. So for the hardware, the common ABBUC member is left with the description in the ABBUC mag and his imagination. The users/members felt uncomfortable with that and so we tried the jury system.

As it turns out now, that the just system takes the burden from the users and puts is in the jury. The result is that now the creators and the jury are both stressed (as there is only very little time available) and unsatified, because there are only very few people involved. Hence everybody will consider the decisions a personal decision and not a decision of the members. And in fact, it is of course. No matter how "objective" you try to be.

 

Summary for me:

=============

Instead of the jury system we should return to the "people's vote". Whatever vote is will be - and how random and biased it might be - it is the decision of all members and everybody (creators and members) will rather accept that, than accepting the decision of a jury.

 

 

Regarding the price system:

=====================

We should remember what the PURPOSE of the hardware contest is: Encourage people to create new hardware for the Atari 8-bit bit. That's it. And the ABBUC has a defined amount of money to this encouragement every year. To encourage the people we have to SPEND this money, if the minimal condition (two entries in the competition) is met. And just like it was decided for the software category there should be one single category based in simply member votes. For the same reasons discussed for the software.

What is the worst thing that will happen? One year two people hand in two simple blinking lights for the joystick port and both get 500 EUR each. What you think will happen? The word will spread and EVERYBODY will try to enter the contest the following year with new stuff - PURPOSE achieved. Also the case of "in development" or "improved version" is simply handled based on the percentage of points from actual voters. If people consider it interesting/worth while, they give points. If not, because is the same as last year, then not.

 

Summary for me:

===============

Remove the categories. We have already a fixed budget. Spend it completely based on the percentage of points an entries has receives from the members.

Basically it means, we handle software and hardware the same way. Simple and transparently, based on the votes of the members.

 

I'm not sure what is required to change this for next year, but we should really try that.

[+CharlieChaplin]

[forgot to quote]: "I'm not sure what is required to change this for next year, but we should really try that."

 

Hmmm,

 

if the members that were present at the JHV 2018 decided that they want to continue a) with the hardware contest and b) with the jury, then you cannot change this decision and have to live with the jury until October 2019. But at the next Abbuc JHV in October 2019 you can make an official + public request (or a petition) to end the jury system for the hardware contest and return to the individual voting scheme we had before...

Edited November 3, 2018 by CharlieChaplin

[_The Doctor__]

what? wait a year to make a request for yet another year? 2 years... head can't wrap around that one...

[Fred_M]

Well, that is not crazy at all I don't know which laws there are in the US, but in many countries in Europe these clubs are required by law to discuss changes with their members and vote about them. I don't know the exact English translation of the German legal entity "Verein" (in Dutch it is a "vereniging"), but do know that it is a legal entity which is required to obey the laws.

 

The annual meeting (JHV= Jahreshauptversammlung) is the official yearly meeting where the board is (re)elected and where all present Abbuc members can vote. That's why the official meeting is part of the JHV.

 

I think you can compare the legal structure of the Abbuc a bit with a homeowner association in the US.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Fred_M

[freetz]

Well, technically we didn't have a vote on whether the contest should be held next year or not (as opposed to the previous year).

Does that mean that there will be no contest next year? No.

 

The general assembly is just one decision making body of the club ("Verein"). German law ("BGB") states that the statues of the club have to define which body of the club has which powers/rights. I don't know ABBUC's statues in detail, but hardly any club gives the general assembly far-reaching powers down to the level of individual activities, including financial matters. That is what the headship ("Vorstand") of the club is voted into office for. So unless anything else is written in the club's statuetes, the club's headship can act independently of the assembly (including spending large sums of money) as long as there is a majority decision within the headship and the activities don't run counter the interests of the club.

 

Of course, if there is a proper motion tabled at the assembly (which requires that this motion is part of the assembly's agenda ("Tagesordnung") and this agenda is delivered to all members within the invitation deadline), then the club' headship cannot act against such a decision. One example this year was the idea to make the sending out of disks with the magazine optional. Currently, this is not possible because the shipping of disks is part of the statutes. To change the statutes, it would have to be part of the assembly's agenda, but the move for this was only made after the invitation with the agenda has been sent out, so no change was possible (this year).

 

What we have done in the past (at least in the last three years) is an opinion poll at the assembly. Nothing more, but also nothing less. Based on this, the headship can then decide whether to follow up upon this - or not. Of course, in the interest of a good climate in the club, the headship will usually do this, but it could modify the way things are run if it sees it in the club's interest. For example, for the software contest, we voted on rather general changes, but not about the exact wording. As in the past, this will be finalized between the ressort heads and the club's headship. If there had been a "proper" vote on exact wording, we couldn't do that (except in a few circumstances).

 

In the case of next year's hardware contest, people are probably assuming that things are continuing the way they have been, including having a jury, so it would probably not appease the situation to just depart from the current system without a discussion. Nevertheless, if the headship were interested in taking up JAC's and others' suggestions, the headship could for example decide to open up voting to all members (and not just those present at the JHV). This way, the general modus operandi of the hardware contest would still be the same because we would still have a recommendation of the jury with a suggested placement, but the members would be voting individually before or at the JHV. If required/desired, the online voting portal for the software contest could easily be mirrored for the hardware contest for that purpose.

[Fred_M]

Correct I just wanted to explain that the Abbuc is a legal entity and not just some "club" The members of Abbuc have to decide (by voting) to change the rules of the hardware contest. That can be done at the JHV or some other voting system

 

As for JAC's idea: I am in favour of it. But I would like to add that every contestant should make a (Youtube?) video so the members can see what they are voting for.

[Faicuai]

OK.

I dont want to sound unthankful, but I thought long and hard about this, and I think I should share my honest opinion about the results, because else it will keep tumbling inside of me, and one day it would emerge anyway, and probably in a lot less nice way.

IMHO I think that, with all respect to the creator of the power meter cart, it is weird that AntiX was categorised at the same level as this project.

First of all, it doesnt even look like a finished project. Its not a cartridge that fits the entire thing. There is an entire Arduino set-up dangling next to the cartridge, not very practical. Even the text already suggests that MAYBE a smaller Arduino can be used....so....is this a finished project, or one still in development ?

Second.....the use of the product. IMHO AntiX is a much more useful product than the Power Meter cartridge for the general A8 user. Even in the ABBUC magazine it is indicated that there are simply some LEDs lighting up, but no real use can be determined.....

This may be just my opinion, but the Power Meter cartridge seems to serve a vey niche market of the A8 community. Even though I created it myself, I think that in all objectivity, no-one can deny that AntiX is a much more general useful product for the average A8 user on both sides of the Atlantic. It opens up using PAL software for the US guys, and gives us Euro guys the possibility to have a steady 60Hz screen, in the correct aspect ratio, and games running on their intended speed.

For this reason, I honestly expected a higher judgement of the jury for AnriX, and Im going to be honest, Im disappointed about that.

I also dont understand that while the software contest has,an online voting option, this is not the case for the hardware contest. Only the people attending the JHV meeting are able to vote on the product. I dont understand that. Sure, the software can be downloaded and judged by every ABBUC member, but for the hardware the descriptions as published in the magazine and published on the forums, and also demonstration videos should give enough info to allow people to vote online.

In general, it seems that the people at the JHV in majority simply follow whatever the ABBUC judges suggest when voting for the hardware.

Anyway, I am grateful and happy with the price I won, but I cant understand that it didnt achieve a bit higher ranking by the hardware jury.

The fact that, electronically, it is a rather simple device shouldnt matter. It is the usefulness and functionality that counts.

Some people at the JHV thought that AntiX simply switched the 5V supply to the ANTIC chips!!!

Well it is not THAT simple, but I have the feeling some people actually judged AntiX on that basis. The files should be out in the open now so everybody can see how AntiX works, and I never hid the fact that the idea and concept is simple enough, but it took plenty of research to find exactly the right chip and also to solve some issues to make it work reliable.

Anyway, I wanted to vent this out in the open because I noticed I felt frustrated about this on the way back home and it grew more on me the last few days.

No personal feelings....just my honest opinion.

First time I read this (as I was avidly searching for Antix latest news...)

 

Whoa!!! Antix deserved 1st place, yes or yes. Reason: it enhances the user experience and machine capabilties FAR beyond any of the inventions posted here (and with very little complexity and installation requirements). THOSE are the upgrades that are worth pursuing!!!.

 

Unified NTSC / PAL SW library? That's the HOLYgrail of our community, as it bridges Americas and Europe's teams talent and work (past and present). Now, with the SAME machine, regardless of origin / region, I can enjoy practically ALL SW development around the world (!) So many PAL titles that I fell short because not being able to display them correctly.

 

My vote for Antix and ALL its ensuing generational and incremental improvements, so we can march to the ULTIMATE video upgrade: PAL/NTSC, and seamless support of RGB / YC / Composite.

 

Cheers!

Edited November 8, 2018 by Faicuai