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