On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, ZN wrote:
> A quick question: what do you use for USB?
http://www.microchip.com/1010/pline/picmicro/families/16c7xx/devices/16c745/index.htm
It's not the easiest or cheapest way to do it, but it gives a lot of
flexibility in design. If I was even remotely considering boards for
manufacture, I would probably work out an easier/cheaper way.
USB97C100's are fun... See:
http://www.smsc.com/main/catalog/usb97c102.html
> The demise of the SGC is connected to an Altera
> EP18010 being used for all theglue logic, a chip which has long ago been
> obsoleted. The FDC controller on the SGC is also not available any more,
> but it has a fully compatible replacement (made by SMSC).
I'm assuming this is a ULA/FPGA. If so, is the logic it represented
available anywhere? The Q40/60 use FPGAs, so we definitely have the skills
to prepare a new part within the community...
(Sidebar:- Why did you use four FPGAs on ther Q40/60? Was it more cost
effective, and/or were the devices representing functional blocks that you
wanted to keep separate?)
> Also, the current
> state of affairs with memory, would make a potential 68EC020 based board
> for the QL very tiny - 16M of RAM could easily be squeezed into two SDRAM
> chips - and that only because 16-bit wide ones are easyer to get then the
> 32-bit wide ones. Something along these lines would make a great QL based
> SBC. Not one to contend for the fastest QL out there, but it should be very
> practical.
Either way, the space/cost considerations of memory are much better than
they used to be. It would be a simple affair to give 16 or 32MB, indeed it
may be as cheap to use two 128mbit or 256mbit parts.
Bottom line. Whatever was produced, whoever by, the full hardware spec
would have to be fixed and made widely available. Compatibility could be
established, and through that, software would use the new features. I'm
sure things like USB are not a priority, and I'm sure a TCP/IP stack and
10/100 should be a high priority in the coming years.
If I were to go out on a limb, I would specify:
Capacity:
68060 - at 50MHz or better
4MB flash ROM - for QDOS, SMSQ/E etc, plus room to grow.
32MB RAM - expandable by daughter card[1]
Interfaces:
Monitor - SVGA, XGA capable
IDE - ATA if possible
Ethernet - 10/100 if possible[2]
Serial - up to 115k
Parallel
Sound - line in, line out, mic
GPA - General Purpose Adaptor[3]
[1] Daughter cards or use SIMMs/SDRAM and throw half the capacity away may
be cheaper...
[2] I think this is essential...
[3] This would be to this board what the expansion port was to QL classic.
OS:
This is much more vague, because it isn't "my area", but I'd be looking
for modularisation of the OS. I'd like it to be much easier to write
device drivers and modules. I would be looking for SuperBASIC, compilable.
The filing system could be all-new, taking advantage of the IDE interface.
LS-120 drives would be the standard, and would replace floppies.
Things like:
open #3, eth0_192.168.1.1
print #3, "XXX"
close #3
and
dim A$(128,128,128)
(...fill array...)
save win1_my_array, A$
would work... :o)
In my mind, I have a very loose notion of how an ISP would pass data
between places or applications. I always felt we should notionally be able
to run an app at a virtual IP address, and the OS and apps could pass data
using the TCP stack. Groovy baby, very groovy.
Anyway, that's about as far from normalcy as I dare drag y'all in one go.
I feel like Marty McFly playing rock guitar on stage in 1957...
Dave
