Proposal universal connector for dev kit - Modulowo duoNECT - and RPI Adapter

We add UART or I2C the connector where possible, and for SPI, can be used one-side duoNECT connector .

So, you suggest adding few I2C or SPI interface connectors to our adapter for Raspberry Pi? With 2 mm pin raster?

Referring to the LCD, it will offer a simple and inexpensive wireless solution via Bluetooth. So, LCD with encoder for control, do not need to be installed above Raspberry Pi.

My experiance so far with the varied connector systems out there (Booster packs, Arduinos, Raspberry PI etc) is they all limit you to one or at best two add ons at a time

In almost al cases I have worked on reciently I have wanted to do more

like an LCD, Touch, ADC, DAC and maybe a few digital I/O, this is rarely available and stacking up into a tower is not the answer either. A stack that allows the driver for an LCD, ADC, DAC etc is one thing but to get a working prototype you need to be able to spread out things a little and have connections to numerious boards / devices at once

I much prefer a set of I2C and SPI connections available through a set of 4  or 6 pin connectors and then a seperate set of Digital IO which could also be connected through I2C or SPI. This is what these buses where designed for SPI - "Serial Peripheral Interface" and I2C "Inter-Integrated Circuit"

If your prototype needs to be mounted into a demo case / enclosure the boards need to be mountable (ADD HOLES FOR THIS), for instance having an LCD stuck onto an Arduino or PI but no means to have the LCD on a panel has a limited use, having it mountable with a short lead to the controller is far more useful. same goes for the sensors, convertors etc, they need to be able to be placed in an appropriate place, not sandwiched in a multilayer stach where heat and other factors affect performance

Matthew Rusak wrote:

 

We wanted mainly to the possibility of mounting add-on boards directly on the motherboard / adapter, so that was not created high "stack".

I understand that, but you can still achieve that objective while maintaining compatibility. You can have had castellated connections that are still compatible with the MikroE layout.

We also have something for the TI LaunchPad, but it's still not ready.

MikroE have such a board for LaunchPads, they call it a Click Booster Pack. I'm guessing you have some more differentiators that perhaps were not clear so far, otherwise there looks like little difference between

the two ranges except that MikroE's is larger/more established.

Castellation isn't really important for prototypes surely? Besides, pins can be trimmed so that boards are within a few mm of each other, or removed (i.e. desoldered) totally for flush fitting

if there was a strong requirement to minimise height in a prototype.

Thanks for the suggestions. It's important to me. We wanted mainly to the possibility of mounting add-on boards directly on the motherboard / adapter, so that was not created high "stack". Furthermore, matching the signals to + 3.3V / + 5V voltage and the ability to quick replacement board to another.

We also have something for the TI LaunchPad, but it's still not ready.

I'd have to say that sounds like a massive oversight. Had you made it pin-compatible (and added your additional two wires on the end if need be) then your potential customers would have benefited from the ability to pick and choose between the two ranges.

Currently if I had to choose between the two, I'd go with MikroE simply because they have a much larger ecosystem currently.

But personally I prefer the TI BoosterPacks, there are hundreds of them.