On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> T200 = different software load. not sure if I released that or not. > Ah, okay. I have only a 102, so I can't test a 200 REX, though I could theoretically build them. What's missing from this entire discussion is software maintenance and bug > fix. > > That is 95% of the job going forward. Building is a straight forward and > bounded time commitment. Software maintenance, bug fix, is a much deeper > dive. Let alone improvements. > > I'm reasonably confident in the firmware, but if a change was ever needed, > someone would have to update and test the RTL. > Agreed. And it's especially bad if the person doing the software work isn't making any money from the hardware sales, but someone else is. I'd like to have a discussion (possibly offline?) with people about what a support model for the REX looks like going forward. In addition to software and/or improvements, the NOR chip is obsolete (though still in decent stock) - so eventually it will become unobtanium and the REX will either need to be redesigned or replaced. The CPLD appears to be a current product though. -Josh
