Code Freeze 2016: LightBlue Bean

I recently attended the Code Freeze 2016 conference at the University of Minnesota.  This year they had a strong slant toward the Internet of Things.

Included in your attendance fee was a LightBlue Bean.  Here are some pictures of the unit.  The LED for size reference--I was too lazy to run upstairs and grab a coin.

The device is designed for the "maker" crowd and, as such, features a sort of built in proto-board at the bottom.  I find that this isn't entirely useful for my needs, as I probably just want to tinker around a bit and not commit to soldering in any sensors or actuators.  I quickly realized this would be of much more utility with some female headers.

The 3V CR2032 watch batteries this thing runs on appear to be another issue I'll run into quickly.  Since I'm hacking up headers, I soldered one on for an external power source at the same time.

This gizmo is set up to operate around 3V, so 3.3V should work just fine as a power source.  I have a new crimper and a bunch of connectors in my parts bin, so whipped up a fancy cable to power the device from my PL-2303HX based USB-TTL adapter.  This particular device has +5V and +3.3V pins--very handy.

Alright, enough with the plumbing.  The real question is "What do I think about this Bean?"  Well, I think it has its pros and cons.

Pros:

• Small, portable, can run on battery power
• Has a SoC for Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE)
• Is programmable over BLE
• Uses the same MCU (AT328P) as the common Arduino Uno
• You can program it with your cell phone
• Has built in RGB LED, accelerometer, and temperature sensor

Cons:

• Isn't terribly common or popular - lack of support
• Lacks headers for easy connectivity for beginners
• Is not really "Arduino Compatible" - it uses a different bootloader, pinouts, etc...
• It was a real pain in the neck to figure out which pins support PWM output
• I cannot program it over BLE from my Windows 7 laptop because they have no Windows 7 support
• The bluetooth device appears not to support the Serial Port Profile (SPP) out of the box, so it's a challenge to get debugging output much past a blinky light
• The protocol used for programming the device appears to be proprietary
• The programming from smartphone is kind of a gimmick.  It's difficult to edit code on your phone and you have to use a "cloud compiler"
• No 802.11x wifi
• There is a proprietary API to learn (sort of)

All in all, it's a neat device.  I'm happy to play with it if someone gives it to me for free (which they did).  I probably would not buy one of these out of pocket.  There are several other options on the market that I would choose over this, depending on my use case.