>but it's likely that the difference between completely
>empty and completely populated will be only $15 to $20 USD.

I appreciate that, but my thinking is along the lines that by the time you
translate that small increment in price to somewhere like the UK, or
elsewhere in Europe where taxes are pretty phenomenal, then this may be the
make or break in the decision for a secondary school student to be able to
afford the base unit.

When I suggested that the add-on bits be supplied as a kit to be assembled
onto the board by the end user, I did envisage that this kit may be packed
by Sean if he was amenable to another hit on his resources. I would think
that the add-on kit could be priced in a manner that ensured a small profit
on it for the bother of this. Perhaps a "discount coupon" in with the
original development board to make them aware of this.


>Finally whatever we do is going to be an open design. So if
>someone wants to hand wire a subset, or if someone wants to
>deliver blank PCBs, then it's no problem. But if we get the
>price point for the full package so that it's not much more
>than the cost of the parts, then we should encourage folks to
>sign up for the full package if possible because fracturing
>the base will compound the support issue.

I can understand where you are coming from. However I still feel that there
is a problem with pricing in the European region. There are a significant
number of tax havens around here where the well heeled go to live for a
reason :)

I do get the feeling that while it would be great to provide a complete unit
ready assembled, with software that allows the purchaser to leap straight in
and start experimenting, the thing is having a tendency to get away from the
original concept which was fired off by the messages from Kieran asking for
help in getting his programmer going.

The concept was something that allowed a PIC to be reliably programmed, to
get away from the vagaries of the various serial and parallel ports which
don't meet true specification. I know I have added messages suggesting
possible features for it as well, but each 5c here, 10c there does help to
push it out of reach of the secondary school student having to pay for it
out of his paper round.

I like the concept of a PCB with defined hardware areas on it, all
completely assembled, so there is a standard set of hardware that we know
they have when they have a problem, and start asking questions. However I do
also feel that there is a point where the hardware provided can be
excessive, and a significant portion of what leaves the factory is not used.
I can envisage the development board being used for MIDI interfacing, this
may include use of the LCD display, but what other peripherals? As soon as
there is a breadboard area to make the board more versatile, then you have a
whole heap of unknowns being introduced, as every board produced could have
a totally different set of additional hardware built on here without the
full tutorial ever being worked through on any board :)

I am just trying to step back and take a second look, as others have done,
and figure if we are not getting wound up with enthusiasm for our "beginners
killer development system" and forgetting that the reason people do go and
attempt these real cheap programmers is a lack of financial resources in the
first place.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.