Yes, Malcolm, the interface is at the socket level. Both of the devices have some pros and cons. I am still open to suggestions for other options.
One thing I am not concerned about is the pitch and number of pins on the WS5300 or any other device. I don't hand solder SMD boards. I use a solder mask to apply paste, position the devices then flow them in an oven. I have done a fair amount of QFP100 and 1mm BGA work with no problems. Although the WS5300 is technically superior as a device (it is more modern, it acts as an ethernet co-processor) the work that has already been done with the CS8900A is very important. Without the work being done on drivers, extensions for languages, etc, it doesn't matter how fly the device is. The CS8900A has some support already. Peter, could you outline what is available for the CS8900A, please? This is why I have opened up the discussion. I dread these discussions :) but I am sat here with two equally good choices for two very different reasons. The WS5300 is a very persuasive CHIP, and the CS8900A has some very persuasive CODE. Since CODE is such a big problem... If the CS8900A is chosen, we'll have a less capable or future-proof device that has much work already done. If we choose the WS5300, it maybe has an extra ten years of useful life but we have to start from scratch with supporting code. That's the balance. On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:48 AM, Malcolm Lear <malc...@essex.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi, > I would think the most important criteria would be to choose a solution > that reduces the software load on 68K. It seems after a brief look at the > data sheets that the W5300's interface is at socket level, is that right? > Malcolm > > > > On 14/04/2014 22:39, Dave Park wrote: > >> I have been presented with two good contenders for an ethernet solution >> for >> the QL. There might be others; I am open to suggestions and may add more >> to >> the list. >> >> I would like there to be a *polite, friendly, respectful, >> constructive*debate about the relative merits of the two devices. Once >> >> you have >> expressed a view, that's enough. No need to restate it, unless you add >> something further. It is very important that discourse be *focused >> entirely*on solving the problem of getting ethernet onto the QL. >> >> >> Please read the data sheets and form an opinion about which would perform >> better on a QL at 7.5MHz or a SGC system at 25 MHz. There is already a TCP >> stack in existence; whether you wish to use it or not is a matter for you >> - >> one of the chips is a microcontroller that has its own stack. >> >> Here are the contenders: >> >> Wiznet WS5300 >> http://www.wiznet.co.kr/UpLoad_Files/Re ... _V128E.pdf >> >> versus >> Cirrus Logic CS8900 >> http://www.cirrus.com/en/pubs/proDatash ... 00A_F5.pdf >> >> If there is a clear consensus, I will assemble some functional prototype >> boards using the favored device, then send boards and documentation out to >> a limited number of people who express an interest in doing development >> work with them. >> >> There would be some gentle conditions: >> >> 1. You'd join a developer mailing list and report occasionally on progress >> you'd made to the other three people and me. Others could join the list to >> provide feedback, etc. The list would allow you to self-co-ordinate your >> efforts within the group. I would not be the boss of you. I would not own >> your work. There is no schedule or deadline. >> 2. Anything you do, once reaching a state of development greater than >> "alpha", would be open source and freely distributable. A GIT repository >> or >> similar would be nice. >> 3. I would, upon release, host information and downloads at SinclairQL.com >> so people can explore the code or develop it further. >> >> If anyone develops anything to a point that it becomes possible to add >> ethernet to a future board, or standalone, I would work out a way to >> produce them for the community. If not, you can keep the card as a >> curio/plaything/collectible, or send it to someone else who has shown an >> interest. >> >> So, let's begin, shall we? >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > QL-Users Mailing List > http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm > -- Dave Park Sandy Electronics, LLC d...@sinclairql.com _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
