Overview of SoC options

[slaeshjag]

About €1 in quantity.

 

[Grench]

About €1 in quantity.

I wonder if they're available in quantity over the Pyra product life cycle or if ED would have to clean out the stock everywhere just to have enough to build from...

 

[thatgui]

Humanity learns from its mistakes. With the experience and knowledge from designing the Pandora, it is possible to use that to make a better design. I'm not expecting wonders, just better.

While humanity (why do you have to take things on that level ?) rarely learns from its mistakes, the Pandora Team as a whole certainly has. But MWeston was already a skilled engineer in regards of designing a pcb (and as far as I know, the new one has already experience in this field too). And this is no "crafted" product either (like carving something out of wood), so a pcb already goes through several design phases before even a prototype board is made, in order to eliminate errors in/optimize placing and tracing components.

If you knew, then why did you even mention it? It's completely unrelated to our argument in that case.

Because I can't guess what you are coming up next with ? It was meant to rule that path out before you get the idea to "walk" it. And it is somewhat related as the top of the pcb is - in theory at least - a place where some components could be moved to.

I put no words in EvilDragon's mouth. I suggested an alternate reasoning that could be just as likely have been EvilDragon's reason specifically as proof that EvilDragon could have numerous reasons to have made the comment, and none of the possible reasons are his reason until he confirms it. Also, I was not "fabulating" about more USB ports. As I said, people were requesting it at one point:

I know that you did not, but neither did I. But as you suggested it I considered its "time to make stuff up", and I wanted to chime in.

Also, I was not "fabulating" about more USB ports. As I said, people were requesting it at one point:

Are you serious ? That makes no sense at all. Just because some people requested something and Ed did not comment it, requires it to be consired ? And why should this only be considered while it servers you argument ? What about another rather "popular" request: including a camera ? Shouldn't we take that into consideration then too, maybe even reserve some space for it on the pcb (which makes it even more crowded) ?

 

[God Ginrai]

Humanity learns from its mistakes. With the experience and knowledge from designing the Pandora, it is possible to use that to make a better design. I'm not expecting wonders, just better.

While humanity (why do you have to take things on that level ?) rarely learns from its mistakes, the Pandora Team as a whole certainly has. But MWeston was already a skilled engineer in regards of designing a pcb (and as far as I know, the new one has already experience in this field too). And this is no "crafted" product either (like carving something out of wood), so a pcb already goes through several design phases before even a prototype board is made, in order to eliminate errors in/optimize placing and tracing components.

 Yes, however, MWeston didn't need to fit extra stuff, so he wasn't constrained to play component tetris on the PCB.

I put no words in EvilDragon's mouth. I suggested an alternate reasoning that could be just as likely have been EvilDragon's reason specifically as proof that EvilDragon could have numerous reasons to have made the comment, and none of the possible reasons are his reason until he confirms it. Also, I was not "fabulating" about more USB ports. As I said, people were requesting it at one point:

I know that you did not, but neither did I. But as you suggested it I considered its "time to make stuff up", and I wanted to chime in.

 You specifically mentioned that EvilDragon's comment was "probably not due to an increase of ports, but a lack of space". At that point, you are putting a reason to EvilDragon's comment that he never said. That's putting words in his mouth.

Also, I was not "fabulating" about more USB ports. As I said, people were requesting it at one point:

Are you serious ? That makes no sense at all. Just because some people requested something and Ed did not comment it, requires it to be consired ? And why should this only be considered while it servers you argument ? What about another rather "popular" request: including a camera ? Shouldn't we take that into consideration then too, maybe even reserve some space for it on the pcb (which makes it even more crowded) ?

Speaking of not making sense, how about the fact that you seem to somehow thing I'm saying that EvilDragon should be considering the USB ports? It was an example of an equally likely reasoning for EvilDragon's comment to show that we can not make assumptions of EvilDragon's reasons for making that comment, because there are plenty of likely reasons.

-God Ginrai

 

[thatgui]

Yes, however, MWeston didn't need to fit extra stuff, so he wasn't constrained to play component tetris on the PCB.

How do you know that ? But keeping that out, did you take a look at the pcb? There seems to be not much room left - and (I guess you know that already) its not only about placing parts, but about traces, and distances and legths that have to be considered, its the super hard with an extra twist stage your playing tetris here.

You specifically mentioned that EvilDragon's comment was "probably not due to an increase of ports, but a lack of space". At that point, you are putting a reason to EvilDragon's comment that he never said. That's putting words in his mouth.

Ok, if that was placing words in Eds mouth, how should I place assumptions I make based on other peoples comments so they are not mistaken as that in the future ?

Speaking of not making sense, how about the fact that you seem to somehow thing I'm saying that EvilDragon should be considering the USB ports? It was an example of an equally likely reasoning for EvilDragon's comment to show that we can not make assumptions of EvilDragon's reasons for making that comment, because there are plenty of likely reasons.

I do not seem to get the point delivered: it is not about you wanting USB ports, it is about you working with arguments that you only accept if they strengthen you point, but unwilling to see that they can be equally used against your argument too.

 

[God Ginrai]

Yes, however, MWeston didn't need to fit extra stuff, so he wasn't constrained to play component tetris on the PCB.

How do you know that ? But keeping that out, did you take a look at the pcb? There seems to be not much room left - and (I guess you know that already) its not only about placing parts, but about traces, and distances and legths that have to be considered, its the super hard with an extra twist stage your playing tetris here.

So you believe the Pandora PCB is absolutely perfect with no problems?

You specifically mentioned that EvilDragon's comment was "probably not due to an increase of ports, but a lack of space". At that point, you are putting a reason to EvilDragon's comment that he never said. That's putting words in his mouth.

Ok, if that was placing words in Eds mouth, how should I place assumptions I make based on other peoples comments so they are not mistaken as that in the future ?

I'll use your original comment as an example:

Change

"ED states that they already have problems including all the necessary ports on the back - and this is probably not (but it is not impossible that it is) related to a massive increase in ports, but due to having no much space left on the pcb"

to

"ED states that they already have problems including all the necessary ports on the back. I think this is probably not (but it is not impossible that it is) related to a massive increase in ports, but due to having no much space left on the pcb"

Speaking of not making sense, how about the fact that you seem to somehow thing I'm saying that EvilDragon should be considering the USB ports? It was an example of an equally likely reasoning for EvilDragon's comment to show that we can not make assumptions of EvilDragon's reasons for making that comment, because there are plenty of likely reasons.

I do not seem to get the point delivered: it is not about you wanting USB ports, it is about you working with arguments that you only accept if they strengthen you point, but unwilling to see that they can be equally used against your argument too.

Now you're not making any sense. I'm not even sure what you are saying in this sentence.

-God Ginrai

 

[slaeshjag]

The difficulty grows exponensially when you add components. It might not be perfect, but for every pin you add, you add more and more curses and time.

Anyone who has routed a tight PCB and then had a "oh, I need one more chip on there"-moment can attest to that.

But that's irrelevant. Only ED and the company he hires can tell if the PCB has space for more stuff or not.

 

[Grench]

The difficulty grows exponensially when you add components. It might not be perfect, but for every pin you add, you add more and more curses and time.

Anyone who has routed a tight PCB and then had a "oh, I need one more chip on there"-moment can attest to that.

But that's irrelevant. Only ED and the company he hires can tell if the PCB has space for more stuff or not.

To make it even more interesting...  a SIM/microSD combo port would be best served if it were on the corner of the board - or at least on a board edge for insertion - unless you're going to use a hinged/gated version like I posted above - although those appear to be in short supply and getting discontinued - but only on Tuesdays with a waning gibbous moon if the special at the diner down the street is serving Chicken Fried Chicken without mashed potatoes.

The levels of contingencies and 3 dimensional modeling that goes into creating a multi-layer board have to be pretty mind numbing.

 

[Granitehead]

But that's irrelevant. Only ED and the company he hires can tell if the PCB has space for more stuff or not.

Like This.
After thinking this through I think I prefer an uSD over eMMC. Even if it's a bit slower. Give people a choice when ordering (no uSD and different speeds and sizes of uSDs with an os image preinstalled) or ship with a relatively small but fast uSD if choices make it too expensive (but why would they with uSDs?).

 

[thatgui]

So you believe the Pandora PCB is absolutely perfect with no problems?

Why ? Why come up with such nonsense ?

change...

Thats probably because I horribly fail in mastering the english language, but I don't see a real difference: there is the hyphen, my use of the word "probable" and the whole subordinate clause in paranthesis that makes it obvious that this is my own interpretation, why do I need the "I think" ?

Now you're not making any sense. I'm not even sure what you are saying in this sentence.

*sigh*lets go the long route:

ME: ED said they already got problems with placing every port. And my interpretation of that it could be a hint at: maybe they already have problems with board space.

You: It could be, but there is also the chance that there are simply more ports now that have to be placed at the back

ME: Not very likely, ED is conservative when it comes to features, and he made no comments about an increase in ports

YOU: But some people requestes more USB ports

ME.1: What ? now we should consider every request ED did not comment on ?

ME.2: And if so, if we need to consider requests of others that Ed did not comment on, shouldn't that argument equally apply to your argument: (simplified) "there is enough space there, we just need to use it". But with that in mind, don't we have to reserve space for other features that where requested, but Ed did not comment on, thus we are back at square one => boardspace ?

 

[vcoleiro1]

Ok guys, call it a truce . Lets move on

 

[God Ginrai]

Ok guys, call it a truce . Lets move on

I would be fine w/ that if he wasn't grossly misunderstanding why I made the comment about the USB ports.

change...

Thats probably because I horribly fail in mastering the english language, but I don't see a real difference: there is the hyphen, my use of the word "probable" and the whole subordinate clause in paranthesis that makes it obvious that this is my own interpretation, why do I need the "I think" ?

By using "I think", "I believe", or similar wording, you strengthen the fact that this is your opinion. Without it, the sentence reads as if you are informed, as if you are stating a fact rather than an assumption.

ME: Not very likely, ED is conservative when it comes to features, and he made no comments about an increase in ports

Actually, EvilDragon did make comments about increasing ports. He specifically mentioned that he would have some sort of HDMI-out or similar, but that he was also keeping the EXT port for other purposes so that you could still reuse the TV-out cable for line in and out.

YOU: But some people requestes more USB ports

ME.1: What ? now we should consider every request ED did not comment on ?

ME.2: And if so, if we need to consider requests of others that Ed did not comment on, shouldn't that argument equally apply to your argument: (simplified) "there is enough space there, we just need to use it". But with that in mind, don't we have to reserve space for other features that where requested, but Ed did not comment on, thus we are back at square one => boardspace ?

Once again, you're not understanding why I mentioned the USB ports. I was suggesting that EvilDragon could have said what he said to shoot down a request for more USB ports. I'm not saying we should assume the USB ports should be included. Also, even if we did include a camera, it would not go on the back of the PCB where it will be so crowded. It would either be in the top part of the clamshell (for an outer-facing camera) or on the top of the PCB. (for a front-facing camera)

-God Ginrai

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

I am glad you two are not my coworkes

 

[ShleeDragon]

http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/02/01/2320234/nvidia-open-sources-tegra-k1-graphics-support?utm_source=slashdot&utm_medium=twitter

I'd argue that.. if NVIDIA is willing to open source the K1 graphical SOC specs.. they'll be aiming for more FOSS friendly hardware...not that it matters anymore

 

[rohezal]

I am glad you two are not my coworkes

Imagine you would have to marry BOTH. I think this is the reason why you can only marry one person

 

[Natsu]

I am glad you two are not my coworkes

Imagine you would have to marry BOTH. I think this is the reason why you can only marry one person

Should that be a reason not to marry anyone? :lol:

 

[doragasu]

Too bad we will not be getting a Tegra K1, now that driver is open sourced

 

[EvilDragon]

They haven't.

If you read the article, you can see that they applied some patches to make it work with nouveau on ARM, but it's not completely OpenSourced.

 

[Letalis Sonus]

now that driver is open sourced

To clarify: They didn't open up anything, they restructured and expanded the already existing open source driver. That code is still pretty much useless for an end user, GL/GLES hasn't even been touched, yet, and it doesn't sound like you could even display anything with it at this point.

 

[doragasu]

now that driver is open sourced

To clarify: They didn't open up anything, they restructured and expanded the already existing open source driver. That code is still pretty much useless for an end user, GL/GLES hasn't even been touched, yet, and it doesn't sound like you could even display anything with it at this point.

From here:

Although the support is still very basic and more user-space changes will be needed to make the full graphics stack run on top of it, we were able to successfully open channels and run simple pushbuffers with libdrm.

I know almost nothing about graphics programming (and because of that maybe I'm terribly wrong), but to me, this looks promising. In fact integrating the know-how of nVidia into the noveau driver looks to me way better than releasing a new and divergent driver. As the article says, "This Tegra K1 Nouveau support is still proof-of-concept but is a huge step forward in coming from NVIDIA themselves.".