Any advise for a hobbyist to select the Kit?
M.Parker
For a generic hobbyist,
Could you people suggest any FOSS kit for the most of the signal
processing stuff(" more emphasis on thr Image stuff"), if it is GUI enabled
then, I'm the luckiest person on the Earth(at least for today).
Platform: windows; if not, Linux flavor too is okay.
thanks for the patience
have a nice day :-)
Rune Allnor
> Hi..folks..,
>
> For a generic hobbyist,
> Could you people suggest any FOSS kit for the most of the signal
> processing stuff(" more emphasis on thr Image stuff"), if it is GUI enabled
> then, I'm the luckiest person on the Earth(at least for today).
Any particular reason why you want a HW kit?
You only need a suitable software program to play with
DSP routines and methods. The HW kits only become important
if you need (or want) to port something to HW.
If you just want to play with ideas, a free matlab clone
like octave or scilab might be sufficient.
Rune
M.Parker
news:b02a9aad-04a9-458a...@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com:
On Sun 05 Jul 2009 12:42:55p,
> On 5 Jul, 08:52, "M.Parker" <mpar...@nodomain.com> wrote:
>> Hi..folks..,
>>
>> � � � For a generic hobbyist,
>> Could you people suggest any FOSS kit for the most of the signal
>> processing stuff(" more emphasis on thr Image stuff"), if it is GUI
>> enabl
> ed
>> then, I'm the luckiest person on the Earth(at least for today). �
>
> Any particular reason why you want a HW kit?
not very serious,
but I need an all-in-one kit for all my
"do it your self activities" {all on my PC}
>
> You only need a suitable software program to play with
> DSP routines and methods. The HW kits only become important
> if you need (or want) to port something to HW.
I'm not good at programming, so I don't have the job of
"porting" anything to that pretty microcontrollers.
All the tests would be on my personal PC.
>
> If you just want to play with ideas, a free matlab clone
> like octave or scilab might be sufficient.
>
Are they GUI enabled + F/OSS ?
> Rune
>
thnx Rune for the quick reply
have a nice weekend :-)
____
where are the other folks..?
Vladimir Vassilevsky
M.Parker wrote:
> Hi..folks..,
>
>
> For a generic hobbyist,
> Could you people suggest any FOSS kit for the most of the signal
> processing stuff(" more emphasis on thr Image stuff"), if it is GUI enabled
> then, I'm the luckiest person on the Earth(at least for today).
> Platform: windows; if not, Linux flavor too is okay.
Before you know what you want, get a book, pencil and paper.
VLV
Richard Owlett
To start with - Just *WHAT* is "FOSS"?
I did Google, did I come up with right answer?
If so, what are your goals?
With reference to Rune's response:
why hardware?
if software, what are you looking for from a GUI?
Richard Owlett
Then ignore most of what VLV posts. He was born perfect etc etc etc
[The sad thing is that he *has* demonstrated TECHNICAL competence]
M.Parker
news:Ig24m.6847$iz2....@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com: On Sun 05 Jul 2009
07:24:55p,
harsh reply :-(
sarcasm will always not work, mind that;
M.Parker
news:jf-dnRJlT4WsL83X...@supernews.com: On Sun 05 Jul 2009
07:33:34p,
> M.Parker wrote:
>> Hi..folks..,
>>
>>
>> For a generic hobbyist,
>> Could you people suggest any FOSS kit for the most of the signal
>> processing stuff(" more emphasis on thr Image stuff"), if it is GUI
>> enabled then, I'm the luckiest person on the Earth(at least for
>> today).
>>
>>
>> Platform: windows; if not, Linux flavor too is okay.
>>
>>
>> thanks for the patience
>> have a nice day :-)
>
>
> To start with - Just *WHAT* is "FOSS"?
FOSS = Free/Open Source Software
>
> I did Google, did I come up with right answer?
>
> If so, what are your goals?
>
> With reference to Rune's response:
> why hardware?
> if software, what are you looking for from a GUI?
>
Honestly other than these 2 things
(1) Sampling Music + (Analysing it)
(2) Image Processing + (again Analysis it too)
I don't have any other thing to do with that program,
I'm expecting all the options( or the things related to the above 2
categories) from the GUI of that respective program.
thnx Richard for your reply :_)
Any ideas..?
______
Matlab is quite good, but it is a Retail product;
no use to me.
Tim Wescott
As Rune said: Scilab/Scicoslab or Octave. I prefer Scicoslab for my own
work, but the image processing library is 3rd party, the Scilab/Scicoslab
team has undergone mieosis and neither product is 100% developed, and
neither Scilab nor Scicoslab is Matlab compatible. I haven't used Octave
for years, but it was OK then and I understand that a number of rough
edges have been knocked off.
I do signal processing and control systems design professionally; until
the team split the blanket I used Scilab exclusively; when the Scilab
team finishes their revolutionary changes and has a product that actually
works close to 100% I'll go back to it. In the mean time I'm quite happy
with Scicoslab under Ubuntu, but I can't vouch for it under Windows.
Octave is more Matlab compatible: it's goal is to use the exact same
scripting language as Matlab. Scilab's goal is to be what Matlab should
have been from the start so it's scripting language is incompatible with
Matlab -- but it has far better (although far from perfect) support for
object-oriented-like programming constructs and a number of built-in
functions to support control systems and signal processing that in Matlab/
Octave are far clunkier.
Unless you have a Matlab whiz close by to hold your hand, I'd suggest
Scicoslab to start with, while keeping an eye on Scilab developments --
when they get Scicos and their debugger working, switch back to Scilab.
Rich Webb
wrote:
>As Rune said: Scilab/Scicoslab or Octave. I prefer Scicoslab for my own
>work, but the image processing library is 3rd party, the Scilab/Scicoslab
>team has undergone mieosis
Humph. Thanks for the pointer. I missed the fork and wasn't aware that
the INRIA group was working on a parallel development effort now.
--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA
Tim Wescott
Subscribe to comp.soft-sys.math.scilab, and you'll see a lot of scicoslab
posts, which is where I found out.
Trying to get the Scilab team to see that doing beta testing, and not
releasing products with broken features (like the debugger and Scicos,
for crying out loud!) is like trying to explain to a skeptical blind man
that he needs someone to check the color of his paint.