Newest Twitter From Craigx May Leave Us New Question?s


Just curious (and sorry if this has been discussed before): Is the nub firmware user-upgradeable after the nub is installed on the board? Just in case some more bugs surface...
 
ljones said:
Looking at the picture above (of the control wired to the main board) it looks intresting, but a bit worrying. It looks a bit .... experimental with the wires soldered across. Isn't that a bit concerning (esp. if the pandoa is only months away)?

ljones
How is this worrying? It's a rig to quickly test the nubs, not the way they're going to be in the ready versions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
wermy said:
Just curious (and sorry if this has been discussed before): Is the nub firmware user-upgradeable after the nub is installed on the board? Just in case some more bugs surface...
Looks like an atmel mcu, so as long as you have access to the programming pins on the processor, I'd have to say it's upgradable. Hardly user friendly though and I wouldn't want to access the programming pins via the main OS (think viruses destroying your nub firmware).

Therefore user ungradable, probably not. But really, how much is there to test ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gp2.eXe said:
wermy said:
Just in case some more bugs surface...
That should be unlikely... according to MWeston and the Nubs Testing, they are now "Jitter Free".
No jitterbug on the Pandora?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Squidge said:
wermy said:
Just curious (and sorry if this has been discussed before): Is the nub firmware user-upgradeable after the nub is installed on the board? Just in case some more bugs surface...
Looks like an atmel mcu, so as long as you have access to the programming pins on the processor, I'd have to say it's upgradable. Hardly user friendly though and I wouldn't want to access the programming pins via the main OS (think viruses destroying your nub firmware).

Therefore user ungradable, probably not. But really, how much is there to test ?


Well, the first version of code delivered wasn't good enough... that's why they need to be patched by poor MWeston.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah... avoid version 1.0 and version 4.anything
smile.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vorporeal said:
Monk said:
Yeah... avoid version 1.0 and version 4.anything
smile.gif

You know, Windows NT 4.0 wasn't so bad...


IIRc I couldn't play ANY of my games on it - with the possible exception of MS "Arcade" titles (I don't recall trying them, but I do recall most games were supposedly no-go with NT of around that era).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top