This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Could an expert on the subject, please add references or text legend to the tables? Ie. I don't know what "pitch" or "shielded" covers in this case. Logixdk (talk) 22:40, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What does the form factor "castellated" mean ? Diepes 5:11, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Castellated PCB's have grooves on the sides which would fit (often standard-pitch) pins on, for example, a parent board; it also makes them fairly simple to use as single components on larger boards using modern, automated production methods. As for 'pitch' (distance between individual pins) and 'shielded' (certainly in case of RF devices such as this), I'm sorry, but those really should not be referenced, explained, or otherwise expounded on in any way. You're welcome to read any of the articles on modern (micro)electronics and their packaging which would certainly provide such information quite readily. Even wikipedia at its most link-happy does not generally reference the 'flat-head' in flat-head screwdriver in an article which so clearly deals with a subject exclusively of interest (or legibility, for that matter!) only to those with a fair footing in the general subject-matter of, for example, automotive technology. --Bolognesus (talk) 20:44, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia audience includes newbies, apprentices, journeymen as well as masters/experts, so defining terminology as you "go along" is crucial to making Wikipedia a learning tool and not just an archive for experts to store their ideas. --116.31.83.194 (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC) William Moore[reply]
As for "castellated", well that's a $50 word for the idea where you can trim the width of a printed circuit board (PCB) by cutting right down the middle of the line of "pin holes". With SMT (Surface Mount Technology) where component real estate must always be minimized to stay in the game, modules are being made this way so they can brag "well by module is smaller than yours", but that begs the question as to how easy it is to mount these components. Having pins in place makes it easier for humans to mount and use, but those expensive and highly automated SMD machines have evolved to the point where only having half a hole for a target is no problem. --116.31.83.194 (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC) William Moore[reply]
The article appears to be written to promote a product, which doesn't comply with Wikipedia's neutral-view criterion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucasFitzgerald (talk • contribs) 17:37, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the article appears to be promoting a bunch of products designed around the Espressif ESP8266 WiFi modules. However, I am not sure that's a bad thing. To be "fairer", perhaps the article could mention some of the WiFi modules which compete with the Espressif ESP8266 like the "TI CC3200" and the "MXCHIP EMW3165". Both of these products provide similar capabilities but are offered at higher prices. TI (Texas Instruments) won't even talk to you if you are talking in quantities of less than 1000, so they are not even trying to appeal to the Makers community. The MXCHIP EMW3165 chip has been out for maybe a year, and I have seen just one NodeMCU like product based around it: the "EMW3165 WiFiMCU Board" from the DoIt/SmartArduino folks in Shenzhen, China. Like Espressif Systems, MAXCHIP (the makers of the EMW3165 WiFi module) is another young (startup?) Shanghai semiconductor company. There are likely other WiFi modules out there that I don't know about. Motorola should probably have one. --116.31.83.194 (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC) William Moore[reply]
Another factor for the cost of entry is the software stack. The TI chips require a commercial compiler which is expensive enough only to give its price by request. The ESP-8266 chips can use the gcc stack or Arduino. Arduino is an IDE (Integrated Development Environment) which uses the gcc compiler and a set of common function interfaces to interact with the hardware. As a first project, a WeMos D1 mini + Arduino + temperature sensor + breadboard costs about $5-10 total. The WeMos D1 includes USB-micro connection so a separate USB-to-UART device is not needed. Ericjster (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That picture is the most beautiful thing I have seen: a paperclip to sandwich to wires in between a coin cell.
Jsmith7342 (talk) 11:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's very hacky indeed! :-) In case we prefer a more neutral image for the info-box or one for the AI-Thinker modules further down, I have uploaded a new photo of the E-01 module: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeptomoon (talk • contribs) 18:16, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Cadence's word on it (quoted via email with non-relevant verbiage removed):
Cadence doesn’t have a L106 or LX106. “LX” refers to the processor micro-architecture, and that may be listed as “Xtensa LX7” for the latest version. Prior to that, it was “Xtensa LX6”[1] ... There was a diamond core called the Diamond Standard 106Micro[2] ...
So, it seems that "L106" is a custom "Espressif-ism". If we want to get more pedantic about it, perhaps something more along the lines of "L106 is Espressif's implementation of Tensilica’s Diamond Standard 106Micro series 32-bit processor core" or something like that. But, the salient point I'm making here is that it's not "LX106". "L106" is fine and "106Micro" is fine.
— BrianKrent (talk) 00:01, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The contemporaneous Tensilica documentation referred to the "low power Diamond Standard 106Micro Processor", the Espressif documentation refers to "an enhanced version of Tensilica’s L106 Diamond series 32-bit processor". Are we going to die on a non-native English-speaking company using their own notation L for "low power". Also like ARM, Cadence license their designs on a royalty basis for other companies such as Espressif to integrate into their SoC devices. It is irrelevant that Cadence states "that is no longer a product that we offer" if Espressif still manufacture ESP8266s. TerryE (talk)
What is the consensus for the definition of "active pins"? (What's written in the wiki article as-is only mentions what it includes, not what it excludes.) So, what is included? And, more importantly, what is excluded?
The text "the other based on callbacks" uses a forum wiki as the RS. Better we use the supplier's own documentation which refers to it as non-preemptive using event-driven callbacks.
Another issue is the statement "An alternative to Espressif's official SDK is the open-source ESP-Open-SDK" This is misleading in that Espressif supply the SDK but leave it to developers to source the GCC toolchain themselves. This project still uses the Espressif-supplied SDK, but simplifies the bundling and building of the toolchain. I suggest we substitute "A complement" instead of "An alternative" -- TerryE (talk)
SRAM space available to users is assigned as below:
• RAM size < 50 kB, that is, when ESP8266EX is working under the Station mode and connects to the router, the maximum programmable space accessible in Heap + Data section is around 50 kB.
So I found no information related to the memory information stated in the Wikipedia article. @Imroy: please help me confirm those information.
The Features section lists "Integrated TR switch", but the text "TR switch" links to "duplexer". OutstandingBill (talk) 10:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article (and indeed that on the ESP32) both claim that the ESP32 is a successor to the 8266. This doesn't appear to be so - I can find no evidence that the 8266 is likely to be discontinued any time soon. They have been for a long time now, and remain, complimentary products. Bagunceiro (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
