<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Beagle Board vs. Hammer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bearfruit.org/2009/01/08/beagle-board-vs-hammer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bearfruit.org/2009/01/08/beagle-board-vs-hammer/</link>
	<description>Matthew Nuzum&#039;s Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:24:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2-bleeding</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: keesj</title>
		<link>http://www.bearfruit.org/2009/01/08/beagle-board-vs-hammer/comment-page-1/#comment-204</link>
		<dc:creator>keesj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-204</guid>
		<description>I like the Hammer a lot and find the Nail Kit very interesting for learning about Embedded development. The Tin Can Tools are prized to high for what they offer by today&#039;s standards.. I personally prefer the Hammer tools because they are more hardware hackable and the software (jtag and soc) are well documented.  TI has made great progress in the last 2 years in opening specs but they still have a long way to go.

The main problem with the Hammer is concurrence from booth side. For robotic projects people use thing like Arduino that are easily programmed (and well suited). on the other side there are BeagleBoards or even x86 based PC with lcd for under 200 Euro.

The other problem for the Hammer is &quot;Koen and the angstrom distribution on the beagle&quot;. The excellent distro makes the Beagle Usable without to much pain for non developers.

 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the Hammer a lot and find the Nail Kit very interesting for learning about Embedded development. The Tin Can Tools are prized to high for what they offer by today&#8217;s standards.. I personally prefer the Hammer tools because they are more hardware hackable and the software (jtag and soc) are well documented.  TI has made great progress in the last 2 years in opening specs but they still have a long way to go.</p>
<p>The main problem with the Hammer is concurrence from booth side. For robotic projects people use thing like Arduino that are easily programmed (and well suited). on the other side there are BeagleBoards or even x86 based PC with lcd for under 200 Euro.</p>
<p>The other problem for the Hammer is &#8220;Koen and the angstrom distribution on the beagle&#8221;. The excellent distro makes the Beagle Usable without to much pain for non developers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt</title>
		<link>http://www.bearfruit.org/2009/01/08/beagle-board-vs-hammer/comment-page-1/#comment-202</link>
		<dc:creator>matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-202</guid>
		<description>[Jadon](http://twitter.com/Jadon) sent me a message on twitter showing a project that uses the [two combined](http://www.hy-research.com/beagle/pictures.html)! Pretty slick!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[Jadon](http://twitter.com/Jadon) sent me a message on twitter showing a project that uses the [two combined](http://www.hy-research.com/beagle/pictures.html)! Pretty slick!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

