1 of 1 people found this helpful
Currently, the NAG (Native Application Guide) is being reviewed and it will be made public once we are done reviewing it.
Thanks for your answer!
Maybe it is the "reviewing" doc that Diego says. It's 404 now...
I have a copy of that NAG ww33 331192-001 Sept 2014, and considering the advancements in just the last 12 weeks, I myself will be waiting for the new NAG when it comes out.
I will wait for the new version too. Thanks.
Could someone that has the old version please post it up somewhere... assuming Intel hasn't forbidden redistribution...
b1tninja, while I do have a copy of that document, I have seen many improvements and enhancements that obsolete much of that document as far as procedures go. As far as the gist - gcc/python on the module image, Eclipse C/C++, toolchain, transferring files with scp or over ssh. I don't think that it is forbidden, but many updated tools make the procedure questionable. I'll state again - it would be better to wait for accurate information.
Thats great ..... Is it possible for interested members to get a preview of the document in question? We understand that its a work in progress and may have some rough edges ... and promise not to hold the authors accountable for typography etc etc .... maybe even help correct a few problems we find here and there to make a better document! Perhaps its by request ... I guess that makes this an official request and guarantee of immunity from the standard blame game for innocent mistakes LOL
Please let me know .... thanks again
ttrostel, first, I am not Intel, though I liked your disclaimer angles. They removed the document for a reason while they are reviewing it for an update. But I could say that it is hard to follow procedures for an image and source that is no longer available. Perhaps reposing your question to DiegoV_Intel who provided the correct answer might give you better clarification. As DiegoV_Intel is now aware, perhaps he can either post the older version or update us to when the NAG might become available. I wouldn't want for confusion to arise from a conflicting version.
If you look at your Edison console over serial or ssh, writing an application in c/c++ is available and the whole gcc command line compiler is available. Eclipse is available as an IDE via the iotdk.intel.com/ website
I have a copy of this document, and my 2 cents is to not hold your breath for it. Look at poky documentation and you will get most of it.
What is interesting is it shows the limits of a company as Intel venturing in an uncharted territory. Intel produces great documentation for designers but they don't seem to understand the dynamic of open hardware. Intel wants to use its quality process tailored for industrial users a different type of user and it is not working very well.
Where is the documentation for bare metal programming of the Atom processor ?
Where is the linux I2S driver ?
Why Intel use PDF instead of a wiki for documentation ?
Linux kernel released as an archive and no public git/svn/cvs, how to contribute ? Are contributions welcomed ?
Release soon, release often. Do someone at Intel understand that it is a requirement to involve users and profit from work of the community ? For now there is a dictator and subjects. Feudalism did not work very well for innovation.
Edison has a very good technical potential as a major platform for wearable, but the technical performances may not be enough to succeed. Or may be success is not the goal ?
I guess it depends where you are coming from. A stamped sized server as powerful as the edison for embedding into my projects is awesome.
(Look at the Helios project - battery powered server and fits in a match box) This makes it an awesome component for wearables.
1) The documentation for programming the Atom processor doesn't have to be in the Edison forum, but the seven volumes version is available on the Intel website as it has been for years.
3) I imagine Intel uses the PDF formats as they are by definition in a Portable Document Format, which for me is perfect.
4) Various projects such as the mraa libraries are inviting of contributions. ask arfoll on how.
5) Dictators and subject? Feudalism? Well, Intel has not made me a servant, requires no royalties on what I will sell other than their base prices they want for me to purchase the platform. But they are not open-source hardware. On top, they have provided assistance and knowledge. You might like to make some friends in the forum, as they have been really helpful.
6) Great potential for a really smart wearable, with better processing power, far more on board resources. I have inter-connected data sources coming into my Edison in real-time, I guess it depends what you'd want to program your eddy to do. I chose to do more than blink. You can check out fab-labs for performance comparisons.
and for #2, I haven't been personally trying to use I2S, but feel free to port a version using the awesome tools Intel has provided and include it in your very own image if you wish. -- You got me on this one.
As far as success as a goal, I am going to add this. It would depend on how you measure success. Does my personal success as a result of Edison reflect on Intel's success, then I might think that Intel will be very successful, and though possibly not as successful as I will feel, it is my blatant opinion, that Intel has provided each of us with something that can spark success for each and every one of us. -- but that is my opinion.
Hmm ... well .... I didn't see that GCC was available (rubbing hands together) >>>> Excellent <<<<
I shall return (insert evil mad scientist laugh)
I'd love some more details .... which may require an NDA ... then I actually have to come up with a solid business excuse (er reason) at work LOL