PC/104
Christopher Friedt
cfriedt-u6hQ6WWl8Q3d1t4wvoaeXtBPR1lH4CV8 at public.gmane.org
Wed Jul 18 16:10:04 UTC 2007
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> I just found the line on the web page 'Based on the powerful Motorola
> 68HC11 E1 CFN2 microprocessor' to seem rather ridiculous. 25 or 30
> years ago that would have made sense. Today it may be flexible and
> useful, but I sure wouldn't call it powerful. I am also not sure that
> advertising 'over 500 sold' is actually going to help sales. It sounds
> like the thing hardly sells at all to be honest.
Sorry to disagree, but having worked w/ the MPP board, as well as some
pretty powerful embedded devices, I would never trade that experience
for anything else. I learned more with that device about general
instrumentation than I would have if we'd have used a more advanced
device, which was exactly the purpose. The 500 sold is also in a very
small market - probably 4 college / university courses with only a
handful of people in them every year, for a few years is pretty good
for not having any marketing campaigns.
> Sure. Very useful devices for small jobs. I still don't consider them
> powerful processors. :)
The 68HC12 paired with a 56k DSP (a la coldfire) is still a fairly
powerful piece of equipment - powerful enough to do frame routing for
HDTV signals at high speeds, and also probably _quite_ less expensive
for dev / production / manufacturing costs. Moreover, the 6812 is only 4
times faster than the 6811.
It's all dependent on what's required for the project of course... if
you need a TCP IP stack, WLAN, or USB host capabilities, then go with
something a bit more sophisticated.
Power is in the eye of the beholder... if I can twist such a saying to
illustrate my point here.
~/Chris
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
More information about the Legacy
mailing list