Chinese ATMega88 clone - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Jope
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 07:35:57 pm
content: Itead Studio is currently running anIndiegogo campaign for their Arduino-like 'Iteaduino Lite' board.The interesting thing is that they don't use an original Atmel AVR, but a Chinese clone of an ATmega88, the LGT8F88 from a company namedLogicGreen.They have acomparison sheeton their website.

author: Svuppe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 09:00:39 pm
content: Wow. They have removed 2 out of 3 gnd pins, and added 8 high sink port pins. I would expect massive ground bounce problems.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 09:09:58 pm
content: QuoteBad for Atmel giving that a lot of their business comes from within China which is driving their success so far.However, I am not sure to what extent volume buyers will embrace a clone. For the one-off market (aka arduino) i don't know who's willing to put up with the potential hustle of a new clone to save a few cents.QuoteBe real.

author: miceuz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 09:19:34 pm
content: I wander what's ADC performance with no separate power pins for ADC and switcher as the main power source...

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 09:32:22 pm
content: They keep the cost low by welding the components on, not soldering:"these pins will not be welded on it,"I wonder why don't they have someone read it before writing these kind of mistakes. It is not like they cannot e-mail it to some Indian proofread company to correct it for 1 USD per page. Does anyone know if the memory size is useful? I've only programmed Atmegas in ASM.

author: Svuppe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 10:01:30 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on December 15, 2013, 09:09:58 pmI am quite serious. 8 pins sinking up to 80 mA each, and everything has to exit through one single gnd pin. I wouldn't trust the ADC for anything, and I would have my doubts about other parts too.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 11:02:37 pm
content: I fully expect there to be all kinds of problems with the first iterations of the chip, but I'm actually kind of excited to see a real second source for a microcontroller on the market. The instruction timing differences means it's not a 100% drop-in replacement, but it should work for the majority of applications. I wonder what this will do to the counterfeit AVR market?

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 11:46:08 pm
content: It's NOT a "real second source." It's not quite compatible. (in relatively interesting ways, actually. Implying that it's not just a clone, either. (particularly interesting is the lack of bootloader support, the odd eeprom size, and a different multiplier.)The single set of power pins IS rather troubling... Maybe you can do that if you implement the core in smaller geometries, and just dedicate extra transistors to the output drivers?

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 11:50:52 pm
content: QuoteSure. But none of that necessarily leads to "massive ground bounce problems".QuoteYou are obviously free to speculate. But unless you have hard data, it remains your speculation.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 11:54:02 pm
content: QuoteIt is instruction compatible with avrs. I doubt there are a lot of code out there that take (dis)advantage of original avr's timing to the extent to break its execution on this clone.

author: MatCat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2013, 11:56:25 pm
content: I especially love where it says only LogicGreen's ISP will program it... I think I would rather stick with Atmel for now.

author: baoshi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 12:43:47 am
content: Their ISP is a VUSB based board, perhaps a USBISP clone. You can take a look here, last 3 items are Emulator, Programmer and Demo board.http://www.mailshop.cn/product_list.jsp?class_id=3640&super_id=1024I heard the dev platform is AVRGCC??!

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 01:13:46 am
content: QuoteYes, according to their own comparison, all toolchains for avr are good for this clone - how that's going to sustain in a legal challenge is unknown.

author: baoshi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 02:24:11 am
content: The company does not have an address, contact number is a mobile, support is on an forum. If I were Atmel I'll go for their customer (if any).Sent from my iPhone usingTapatalk

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 04:00:04 am
content: Anytime there is more competition, the consumers benefit. As long as it is a legitimately done clone, I think it is a good thing for the industry. I am sure there will be tons of issues to iron out. This may be their learning process.I would not find the clone they have depicted as interesting. When sold installed in a board, it diluted whatever price-advantage their CPU offers. Beside, I wouldn't want a board that I cannot replace a blown CPU.Personally, I prefer to see a dip drop in replacement that enhances the original - like the way Intel (and competitor) CPUs were in the early x86 era. Motherboard permitting, one can drop in a 90MHz and replace the 66MHz P4/P5 and off you go with bigger/better system. Say, with this enhance CPU drop in, you have 2K of ram instead of 1, or 48K of flash instead of 32K, or a 12 bit ADC instead of 10... That approach may take the market by storm. Those with a Arduino board may find it a lot easier to buy another chip to plug into their existing board then purchasing yet another. With that, they can builds experience for their designers, market understanding, and builds name recognition for their product (AMD, etc vs Intel) along the way. Eventually they would earn enough name recognition that they can sell a CPU entirely of their own design instead of a work-alike of someone elses' design.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 06:08:51 am
content: Quote from: dannyf on December 16, 2013, 01:13:46 amIt at least used to be the case that you couldn't copyright an instruction set, although parts could be covered by patents.

author: Svuppe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 09:22:37 am
content: Quote from: dannyf on December 15, 2013, 11:50:52 pmWell, perhaps "massive" was too harsh a word.And after reading the datasheet, I see that the intention is to use the 80 mA pins for multiplexing common-cathode LED displays, which means only one pin sinking the high current at any given time. Not all 8 pins with 80 mA each. That is something different altogether.Unfortunately, the datasheet does not specify the total current allowed for the entire chip.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 11:23:18 am
content: QuoteGiven how mcus are used, that kind of market and demand must be tiny.

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 12:35:29 pm
content: QuoteThis is not very prevalent in retail sale, but when you go into volume production, such things happen quite often. Granted - the different sources are almost never 100% compatible (99% would be my guess), but they are usable.

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2013, 10:54:31 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on December 16, 2013, 11:23:18 amYeah, I suppose you are right. I was thinking merely of the experimenter market rather than the whole market. Consumers isn't likely going to choose a Microwave oven based on the MCU they use.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 06:35:17 am
content: I would expect that the chip is aimed at whatever market is responsible for all those "ATmega8 for $1" China gray-market deals you see on eBay (but I don't know what those are!)

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 01:14:50 pm
content: Not surprising, Holtek made PIC clones before so I guess the next logical step is an AVR clone.But the Chinese still seem to prefer 8051 clones (AFAIK Intel doesn't make them anymore) for "general purpose" MCU.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 01:52:53 pm
content: QuoteThe 8051 is such a wonderful chip. Way ahead of its time.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 05:10:41 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on December 17, 2013, 01:52:53 pmAnd way behind modern times.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 07:13:44 pm
content: Sure, if you let mkting think for you.

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 07:24:02 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 17, 2013, 05:10:41 pmAlmost every tutorial on the 8051 I see on youtube is hosted by someone from India or a nearby country.So at least some people in India seem to think it's useful. I've had some interest in watching videos on it, but eventually I seem to exit out because I have to concentrate too hard on understanding the instructor.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 07:28:11 pm
content: There is still obviously a huge market for those chips - instruction set is patent-free and there is plenty of tools.But I'm not doing any designs on the architecture with a single accumulator register, it is just too much pain for no particular gain.

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 08:34:37 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on December 17, 2013, 07:24:02 pmYou know, between India and China, you are talking 1/2 the world's population. I recall reading that India (or China, don't recall which) each year graduate more engineers than the entire engineering population of the USA. So there is a lot of engineers out there and soon to be a lot more.China may make "crap" now, so did the Japanese in the 50's, 60's, and perhaps even 70's. Soon, perhaps, Chinese could become a must-learn for engineers....

author: AndersAnd
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 09:12:14 pm
content: Quote from: Jope on December 15, 2013, 07:35:57 pmQuoteIt claims both MCUs has a 32 MHz internal oscillator.ATmega88A only has a 128 kHz [edit: and a 8 MHz] Internal Oscillator. A 32 MHz oscillator wouldn't make sense on an ATmega only specified to 20 MHz anyway.LGT8F88A is however specified to 32 MHz and the block diagram shows both a 32 MHz and a 32 kHz internal RC oscillator:

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 09:36:51 pm
content: Quote from: AndersAnd on December 17, 2013, 09:12:14 pmIt has two internal RC oscillators, one 128kHz and one 8MHz.

author: AndersAnd
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 09:48:09 pm
content: Quote from: andersm on December 17, 2013, 09:36:51 pmYes you're right, but not a 32 MHz oscillator like the comparison table shows.

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 10:44:49 pm
content: Have they issued AVRGCC patches for their mcu?Alexander.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 10:50:31 pm
content: It is fully compatible with all existing compilers. At least that's what they claim.

author: AndersAnd
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 11:08:30 pm
content: LogicGreen has another MCU series named LGT8F0XA too, with an MVR8X 8-bit RISC core.Anyone know if these are clones of other MCUs too and if so which ones? Are these ATtiny clones or something?These are only specified up to 3.6 V though.http://www.mcugreen.com/?page_id=4431Quote

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 11:22:18 pm
content: They are AVR clones as well, but more sophisticated than ATTiny, it might be some earlier ATMegas or not a complete clone (peripheral-wise).

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2013, 11:26:40 pm
content: They actually provide a header file for this part. I don't read Chinese, but it looks like it is a modified version of atmega164 with reduced memory.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 03:26:20 am
content: QuoteYour choice, of course. But that does does eliminate a LOT of 8bit microcontrollers!No Freescale 8bit controllers.No Microchip 8bit controllers.No 8051 based controllers from anyoneNo STM8.I think it pretty much only leaves AVR and some 8080/Z80 derivatives (Zilog, Renesas) ?(actually, I'd claim that learning a "single accumulator architecture" is pretty important if you're going to bother with 8bit microcontrollers at all (an arguable topic, of course), and that that a lot of the *interesting* architectural differences show up in the things that are done to entice embedded developers, like the bit processor in 8051, or the direct test instructions on "memory.")What do you care, if you're programming in a HLL anyway?

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 03:38:09 am
content: Yes, and I try avoid all mentioned MCUs. I've started with singe accumulator MCUs and I'm not sure if studying them can be of any benefit, except for broadening the knowledge, of course.It also leaves ARM, which is my current first choice. I like to have free and open development tools that I can run on any platform I choose.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 05:21:59 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 17, 2013, 10:50:31 pmA patch with the changed instruction costs may let the compiler generate better code for their chip.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 06:20:12 am
content: QuoteI think there's something great about some unknown Chinese company being able to come up with an AVR-compatible coreandmaking it faster the Atmel's. Almost like Intel vs AMD...?FYI for the 8051 and related single-accumulator architectures (6502 comes to mind), the first 128 or so bytes of "memory" are to be treated as registers.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 06:26:01 am
content: There is plenty of open AVR cores out there, you don't need to invent anything."Faster" is also questionable. Just yesterday I ran Xmega chip at 48 MHz (32 MHz maximum frequency according to the datasheet). I just needed to test that clock for USB is ok. This does not mean that Xmega can run at 48 MHz over entire temperature range.And Atmel is liable if parts do not work as claimed in the DS. Do you trust that some Chinese company, for which there is no contact information to be found, made all the test and can guarantee that parts actually perform according to the DS (which is only available in Chinese)?

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 06:28:19 am
content: Quote from: amyk on December 18, 2013, 06:20:12 amIf memory serves, AMD was a "second source" manufacturer making the 486 (386?) under Intel license. So they AMD not start from scratch. There were however a few other manufacturers (Cyrix, VIA...) I believe at least one of these two is Chinese owned.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 06:51:46 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 18, 2013, 06:26:01 amSeveral instructions execute in fewer clock cycles on the LGT8F88A, so clock-for-clock it is faster than the ATMega88

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 07:00:48 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on December 18, 2013, 06:26:01 amWhy not? One just needs to know who is behind the guarantee.If you own a laptop, chances are, (80-90% probability?) they are made by a Chinese manufacturer. Got a microwave oven? Chances are, they are made by a Chinese manufacturer. So plenty of the Chinese manufacturers and designers seem to be doing an adequate or even a good job doing what they are/were contracted to do, and their US counterpart feels the stuff done is good enough that they have no problem standing behind their products made by their Chinese contractors.Obviously, HP (or GE, or...) wouldn't just do a web-search to decide who would be their OEM manufacturer. They choose carefully and the quality of the choice is reflected by the quality of their own decision making process.There are good companies there as well as here (where ever here is), and there are bad companies there as well as here. One just need to be careful and know the company (brand/dealer) one deals with.eBay or AlliExpress permit a kind of business model that can be abused by crooks easier than other business models. I would not judge all Chinese companies by the crooks and products one can find on web-retailers. Unfortunately we being forum readers on the internet likely let internet experience weight too much in our judgement.When I was working in New York City over 10 years ago, I could readily buy a "genuine Rolex" for $10 within blocks from my office. I can also get camcorders, VCR, walkman tape players... I am sure I will get what is coming if I spend $6 for a "genuine new Sony Walkman" and expected a real Sony Walkman. Shopping in NYC then (and perhaps now) was no different than strolling down the web. You got to do your homework - and if the deal seems to good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 07:01:36 am
content: Ah, that. That is also a characteristic of the available open cores, they often don't follow original timings and sometimes they are faster. We can give them that, but I don't really think it is important. You don't use AVRs for high performance applications.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 07:08:03 am
content: Quote from: Rick Law on December 18, 2013, 07:00:48 amI'm not saying that all Chinese companies are bad, and I see that a lot of electronics comes from China.But this particular one is bugging me more than any other. For one, it is not clear what the legal status of their product, we'll have to wait for Atmel's reaction.I personally don't understand what exactly is patentable about MCU architecture/instruction set, but something is holding everyone else from making AVR-compatible chips. And I also know that there is something in ARMv3 and above that prevents open implementations, so there is something you can patent and I'd really like to hear an explanation of what it is exactly.

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 02:06:09 pm
content: Is there any source code/make files available for their clone. I wasn't able to locate an AVRGCC example.I they are offering more options how can the compiler make use of those option without being patched for?-mmcu=Alexander.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 03:09:11 pm
content: "-mmcu"what did they say this chip is a clone of?

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 05:03:13 pm
content: Quote from: firewalker on December 18, 2013, 02:06:09 pmThey are not offering anything extra, they just have some instructions that take less time to execute than their counterparts from the "prototype" device. So just select mega88 and you will be fine.

author: baljemmett
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 18, 2013, 10:13:23 pm
content: Quote from: Rick Law on December 18, 2013, 06:28:19 amGoing back further than that, too -- I've seen AMD-fabbed 80186s, for instance. Not sure about anything older than that, though.

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2013, 03:27:26 am
content: Quote from: baljemmett on December 18, 2013, 10:13:23 pmI think it was 8080 through 286. When Intel started reconfiguring for the 386, AMD started making faster 286 CPUs. Then Intel decided to end their relationship with AMD because they didn't want to share the 386 market with them. Lawsuits back and forth took place. AMD wasn't sure if they'd win in the end so they started a clean-room reverse engineering of the 386 and made socket compatible CPUs through the P55C architecture. When Intel released the Pentium II, AMD continued the P55C/Socket 7 platform by upping the data bus to 100MHz.When the Athlon came out, the bus it used was based on the DEC Alpha 21264 EV6 bus but coupled to DDR RAM, while Intel was making a failed attempt at supporting SDRAM and Rambus at the same time. (Which also included motherboard recalls due to design flaws in the SDRAM support)

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2013, 06:53:06 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on December 19, 2013, 03:27:26 amI guess I forgot more than I remembered...Someone once said, 5 years in business is a life time (and he was not even referring to computers). The 8080... that was many many life times ago for the microprocessor business.

author: AndersAnd
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2014, 05:54:38 pm
content: Quote from: Jope on December 15, 2013, 07:35:57 pmThey also added a new PDF document a couple of weeks ago:Migrating from ATMega88 to LGT8F88Ahttp://www.lgtic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/migrating_from_atmega88_to_lgt8f88a_v1.0.pdfQuote

author: LukeW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2014, 03:04:01 pm
content: Personally I'm not convinced that much good comes from this "race to the bottom of the market" in terms of ultra-cheap hardware with every possible corner cut off it.They've used a CP2102 as the USB virtual UART chipset. How fast is this virtual UART? Probably significantly slower than the speeds you will expect with an ATmega8U2-based system. And you'll need the drivers for that chipset installed on your PC, too. Are working drivers available to suit your operating system? Maybe.You need a custom-patched version of the Arduino IDE to add support for this hardware target. You can't just use it with a stock Arduino IDE that you've downloaded and installed.And if the firmware on the microcontroller is somehow corrupted or replaced, are the appropriate files, toolchain and documentation available to allow you to successfully re-flash it? It's not clear that this is available. And if not, what? You throw the hardware in the bin?In some of the photos it looks like they're not even populating a crystal on the board. Are they using an internal RC oscillator? Then for best results the user should understand that that's the case, and that you can't have really accurate timing.And they've changed the voltage regulators... how well documented is that? Are the specs really trustworthy?They specify the maximum allowable input voltage is 24V... and you can clearly see there are a couple of 25V rated tantalum caps in the power supply input part of the board. Thick purple tantalum smoke here we come! Even if you use the board within a reasonable voltage limit of say 15V, what is the realistic current output available from the 5V and 3.3V pins to power external loads?And even if the microcontroller really was "close enough" to an ATmega88, you have to recognize the memory limitations of an ATmega88 compared to an ATmega328 you might be used to. Even with support for that chip added to the Arduino IDE, it is likely that many existing Arduino programs that are tested and working on a real Arduino Uno or equivalent will not work.Many of today's Arduino programs/examples out there in the community will fail to work on an Arduino bootloader equipped ATmega168 with 16k of Flash, and going to an ATmega88 is half as much again.And when it all goes pear shaped, somebody who doesn't really know what they're buying goes and posts on the Arduino forums etc and says I bought an "Arduino" and it doesn't work! And the Arduino team in Italy, understandably, gets pissed off.If the third-party company released Arduino-compatible products clearly labelled with their own brand, under their own name, with their own website where you could go to for support questions for that company's products, and it was clear that this is not "from Arduino", it's released and supported and manufactured by a third party company even though it is Arduino-compatible. A lot of the cheap Chinese hardware makers really fail to do this at all and I think this is what pisses off the Arduino team in Italy, whereas Sparkfun or Freetronics, for example, are responsible in this regard.Basically, lots of little subtle complexities make it harder to use, especially for less experienced users who are just starting out learning to work with Arduino. For users who are just starting out learning to work with Arduino, I would recommend buying a known reliable, well supported hardware platform, from the official Italian Arduino team or from Freetronics for example.The people that this hurts the most are newbie Arduino beginners, not experienced electronics enthusiasts who understand what they are and are not buying.And then they go and complain to the Arduino forums or something that "their Arduino does't work!"And then what? The Arduino team gets pissed off about "counterfeiting", the Arduino team is more likely, perhaps, to move away from openness in the future and start keeping designs closed, and people think that Open Source Hardware is a failure from a business perspective and the misconception persists that you can't build a viable business around OSHW because China rips it off.And the misconception persists that everything China makes is shit, and the misconception persists that as an engineer you can't touch China at all and you must not have them involved with your manufacturing at all because they are nothing but poor quality, IP theft and generally engineering poison. Are these misconceptions good for Chinese business? Wouldn't it be in their best interests to address them?

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2014, 03:40:18 pm
content: QuoteI think for a market to flourish, you need a broad spectrum of products, from Chevys to BMWs. As long as there are demands for such low-quality products, there should be such low-quality products - who are we to say only XYZ should be produced but not ABC? The freedom to choose includes the freedom to choose sub-par products - each and everyone of us does that everyday.QuoteIt depends on how you position your products. If you are in the business of selling Chevys, you should not use high quality interior or fancy engines."Selling Chevys" is effectively where they are in their development cycle: they are following the footsteps of the Japanese (in the 60's and 70's) and the Americans (in the 30's and 40's).20 years ago, China was the in the business of primarily exporting toys, shows and pencils. Give them another 20 years, god know what they will be exporting then.So I wouldn't worry for them.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 05:00:34 pm
content: It is not like this is an official Arduino product. And there has been plenty of "compatible" clones, their market is so small that no one will notice.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 05:14:41 pm
content: I have a relatively large amount of respect for Itead and Seeed; they seem to "get" the open-source hardware culture, and their clones have been (frequently) boards with significant additional thought and design applied. This is an interesting experiment on their part, and I hope it works out for them. As others have pointed out, the "slightly cheaper clone of an Atmega88 *chip*" isn't very interesting "over here"; I do wonder whether it has implications for shipping the board to other parts of the world, though...

author: miceuz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 16, 2014, 12:24:41 pm
content: I have chiped in for this board, yesterday got email, they are already shipping. It's easy to run electronics crowdfunding projects when you are basically a fab frontendWill write a report when I get it.