I think majorly it was because -

- its based on 8051, which many might consider antique. Well, they are ignoring the fact that silicon labs has made it so much more faster, i can't wait to test it.

- its low cost, so no one wants a timeline to follow when they can buy it and learn at their own pace. But then the point of roadtests is to help others learn, and learn in the process. Not just learn alone.

- its documentation and use is not widespread, and it can prove to be challenging. That's something that'll make this roadtest intersting for me. Hence i applied for it.

And I am glad that i did. The space invaders demo that comes with the board just made me nostalgic and happy at the same time!

I want to thank everyone who participated in this discussion. Your input is helpful. While my job is to recommend products for roadtesting and assist our sponsors in understanding the program, I sometimes heed some help in seeing the big picture. So, thank you.

I have one last kit to roadtest. I would like to use it. Since enrollment for the roadtest is closed, I think a better approach would be to offer it to a member who would be interested in using it to build a project. If you or anyone you know would be interested, leave a comment, or message me at rscasny

Thank you for participating in the element14 community.

Randal Scasny

RoadTest Program Manager

I just finished watching the latest episode of Picard so I feel like using a space analogy.

If this RoadTest were a moon, it is currently not orbiting the planet (i.e. technology) I am delving into.

As shabaz alluded to in his post doesn't plug into or interface with technology I am currently playing with. It would require a major mental shift, to shelve what I am working on to take up the project.

I think it also came at a bad time because of competing RoadTest that do fall into my technology road house.

I did read it and do some brain storming but couldn't find the time to commit. To fully understand it would have take some additional time to develop.

Hello,

I wanted to add my two cents even though I've been missing in action for long while now.

Speaking for myself and I think it has been brought up before is the issue of return on investment (ROI). For a kit like this the ROI is very now, but that not the whole issue. I have spent hours on small kits like this to ensure I give the best possible review. I often deal with the company behind the review to resolve issue and help give a better explanation of the product and its issues. I did this recently with the NXP motor Controller I reviewed.

For me the real issue comes with the lack of acknowledgment and progression with a kit like this. When I first started doing roadtests I was happy to just get selected with the idea that I would eventually graduate to bigger better and more interesting kits and even equipment. The concept of show what you can do and then you will be rewarded was how thought of this whole endeavor. This is not to say learning is not part of the adventure, but that learning bigger and more complex products would be in store after showing you can learn and review the smaller ones.

This never really happened. I've applied to a number of the larger more interesting roadtests but never seem to come out on top. Instead I see people selected that seem to only apply to these larger more complex and valuable roadtests winning. The idea then became, why give so much to a community that seems to only reward those that only enter for the good stuff and not those that put in a lot of efforts for the smaller stuff and are willing to start from the bottom. It was the same reason I disliked the "top member" concept, there are a lot of people that contribute here and help out but it seems there was an inner circle that you could not get into even with a  lot of dedication if someone on top felt you were not worthy.

In short, I stopped applying because I felt in some ways like the sucker taking the easy to get stuff and working twice as hard to get a decent review only to be passed over when it came to the more advanced and somewhat interesting gear.

That's my 2 cents

Kas

I'm currently using a different version of this bluetooth module and had looked at doing a sort of review of it but passed on that. I'm looking to use it in a project of mine that I'm currently working on hence my questions with the MKR1010 and its UART interrupt structure.

Overall it's a great board easy to use but will only talk to other boards of the same type, it's got some proprietary framework thing in the bluetooth (It's late and I looked into it a few months back before I started looking at teh code). This means that you can't talk to a bluetooth module from another vendor unless have the right software. Hence you need their app or thir framework in your android app to be able to use it with your phone etc.

For my project it works as its pretty much a point to point connection but if you wanted to talk with random other bluetooth devices you'd be stuck from what I recall.

Kas

Spoken out of my heart.

I've been absolutely fascinated by all the replies give here. One thing that struck me is perspective, especially on ROI.

It struck me that there are actually two perspectives when it comes to ROI.

There is the perspective of an employee or contractor (i.e. the individual) where ROI represents a view on whether this road test effort will enhance my capabilities and expertise and will the employment market value this.

Then there is the perspective of the employer or the business owner where ROI represents a view on whether this road test will provide competitive advantage by gaining first hand knowledge of the capabilities and the most likely development effort + BOM cost required to produce a product using this device.

It's become clear to me that you cannot always marry the two.

Sir, Randall Scasny, I am interested in using the Silicon Labs Bluetooth Design Kit for one of my projects. I wasn't able to enroll for the Roadtest as I realized about the same after the deadline had ended. I have also messaged you the details for which I require the kit. Looking forward to your response.

Yes it's an ongoing problem, which no one seems interested in actually fixing.

A big reason people have for not entering a roadtest is not having the equipment needed to test it.

Randal knows this from a poll he ran recently, yet nothing has changed.

The Tektronix gear isn't going to anyone who actually needs it.

Hey @rscasny how about some Roadtests the 'Top Members' cannot enter/comment on ?

Try it as an experiment, see if more people show interest.

I'm sorry I disagree.

To eliminate the top members from entering is a disservice to the vendors that provides products to evaluate. Those top members have earned their place. The quality and quantity of output is impressive. Restricting them from competing not only hurts the vendor but me also. I want to learn and maybe someday earn the privilege of the title of top member.

It is unfortunate that choosing to entering the competition arena is based on the chance of success. I can't accept not applying because others are to good. I don't see an reason to level the RoadTest playing field because it is already level.