b...@iaxs.net said:
Aren't these units vintage 2000?
The ROM/PAL stickers on mine say 9905 and 9914.
b...@iaxs.net said:
The Motorola 68000 CPU was available in 1982
When did HP ship their first GPSDO?
Ahh. I have a Z3801A that says:
COPYRIGHT 1991-1995 MOTOROLA INC.
SFTW P/N #
Hi
On Dec 5, 2014, at 3:11 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote:
b...@iaxs.net said:
Aren't these units vintage 2000?
Rumor has it that HP started the project for Lucent *before* the Z3801 came
out. Lucent didn’t buy them for a long time. HP decided to chase other
customers.
HPs unit cost for 68000s would have been very, very good. Add up all
the instruments and laser printers (I think the controllers where
parcs ?), then add the 1000's of man hours of software experience you
can imagine why a 68K.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Doug Ronald d...@dougronald.com
These dates and versions are from the internal Motorola GPS receiver and
not the Z3801A itself..
Op 05-12-14 om 09:11 schreef Hal Murray:
b...@iaxs.net said:
Aren't these units vintage 2000?
The ROM/PAL stickers on mine say 9905 and 9914.
b...@iaxs.net said:
The Motorola 68000 CPU was
everyone
for the answers...
-Doug
W6DSR
-Original Message-
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Pete Lancashire
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2014 7:29 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Questionable question about
d...@dougronald.com said:
Also, yes, the 68000 latency most likely required an FPGA's real time
capabilities.
The 68000 was just a CPU. It didn't have the typical counter/timers (or
other IO gear) that are found in many modern chips targeted at the embedded
market. Today, you can probably
Am 05.12.2014 um 21:20 schrieb Hal Murray: d...@dougronald.com said:
The 68000 was just a CPU. It didn't have the typical counter/timers (or
other IO gear) that are found in many modern chips targeted at the embedded
market. Today, you can probably get everything you need on an Arm SOC.
That's
Hi
On Dec 5, 2014, at 3:20 PM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote:
d...@dougronald.com said:
Also, yes, the 68000 latency most likely required an FPGA's real time
capabilities.
The 68000 was just a CPU. It didn't have the typical counter/timers (or
other IO gear) that are
Do any have the 68332 ? That's got the TPU - Time Processing Unit.
Pretty good at multiple time domains or, in their frequent job as
engine controllers, mixed time/crank angle domains.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Gerhard Hoffmann dk...@arcor.de wrote:
Am 05.12.2014 um 21:20 schrieb Hal
I have sort of a dumb question about the Lucent KS-24361 RFTGs. Why do you
suppose there is so much compute power in these units? They have the Xilinx
FPGA, and the 68000 CPU just to discipline a 5 MHz oscillator? There must be
more going on with these devices than meets my eyes.
Thanks
There is many little things it does spread-out over the second, but in
the end, much of the time is spent in the idle-loop, as it should be.
The processor is sufficiently large to handle processing and memory
needs, and a suitable real-time OS can be run on it with debugging
support, that
Hi
You need the FPGA to do the timing. A CPU / MCU is not fast enough or
deterministic enough to do that. By today’s standards, that’s a small FPGA.
The HP guys did not like to do assembly code if they could avoid it. The “lots
of CPU” (for the day) let them run things like Forth. Again,
The Motorola 68000 CPU was available in 1982 (and a fine processor it
was at the time). Aren't these units vintage 2000?
Bill Hawkins
-Original Message-
From: Doug Ronald
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 2:03 PM
I have sort of a dumb question about the Lucent KS-24361 RFTGs. Why do
13 matches
Mail list logo
